Shanedorf Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 Jared Cook and AR reminisce about the Dallas game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 Welcome to the NFL Jaire.... Throwing a bomb on the first play of the game was something that Andy Reid tried from time to time...and its a reasonable guess that his protege, Bears new HC Nagy, might try it in the opener vs GB on September 9th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted August 25, 2018 Author Share Posted August 25, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said: There is a reason though that this is the case- the league is struggling to find tackles that can play. Colleges are not producing guys that are ready. You may feel that Bell is a guard, but he was brought in to provide that extra tackle depth that you are looking for, and guys that will be available will be like him. Fixing tackle is going to be a long term issue unless you get very, very lucky. I disagree but I also think you're getting to a point I'm not trying to make. No one is saying drop Murphy and find a Bulaga on the street. I'm saying find a guy who's simply showing more consistency than Murphy. We don't need to "fix" tackle, we have two of the best and a "tolerable" third guy in Spriggs. We are talking about that last tackle spot. If your argument is that there isnt a guy out there now, let alone one who will be out there in a week from now, who wont be a more consistent improvement over Murphy at tackle, then you and I simply are not going to agree because that's not even a reasonable argument IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 I think with any backup spots, there is a wide variation on the great-to-awful continuum. Obviously no team has 5 great tackles. The concern is that Murphy is nearer the "awful" extreme than is typical. And packfan's view is that somebody a little further up the anti-awful continuum may become available. That's a scouting eval, and I have no idea. But I think the Packers have often had a lot of crummy backups, but I do kinda feel like it's worse than usual this camp. HOpefully it's never an issue. It's unrealistic to anticipate Bulaga and Bakhti playing every game. But it's not unrealistic to hope that two of the first three OT's will be available most or perhaps every game, and that you won't need to go to OT #4 much. Which is why I'm much more interested in Spriggs, *IF* he's now elevated to #3, than I am in Murphy. I didn't see the game. Some posters were variably negative about Spriggs game; Donzo was extremely positive. I'd love to hear some additional perceptions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Penske Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 36 minutes ago, craig said: I think with any backup spots, there is a wide variation on the great-to-awful continuum. Obviously no team has 5 great tackles. The concern is that Murphy is nearer the "awful" extreme than is typical. And packfan's view is that somebody a little further up the anti-awful continuum may become available. That's a scouting eval, and I have no idea. But I think the Packers have often had a lot of crummy backups, but I do kinda feel like it's worse than usual this camp. HOpefully it's never an issue. It's unrealistic to anticipate Bulaga and Bakhti playing every game. But it's not unrealistic to hope that two of the first three OT's will be available most or perhaps every game, and that you won't need to go to OT #4 much. Which is why I'm much more interested in Spriggs, *IF* he's now elevated to #3, than I am in Murphy. I didn't see the game. Some posters were variably negative about Spriggs game; Donzo was extremely positive. I'd love to hear some additional perceptions? I think that is probably recency bias. Since it doesn't really count, most of us will forget a lot or some of the preseason. I think it was 13 or 14 when we didn't get a look at any of the second string WRs or RBs because the OL was so bad. Last season everyone was beating up Spriggs, this year it is Murphy and Bell, before that Barclay was a favorite punching bag, before him it was Breno, and those are just guys that made the team. I don't think they were that bad before the Raiders game either. All 3 QBs have had decent games with these linemen. Maybe the Raiders are just better than the Titans and Steelers? And if we are mad about our back-up tackles getting beat, how do you think fans of other teams are reacting to Reggie Gilbert making some plays? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TransientTexan Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 1 hour ago, craig said: But I think the Packers have often had a lot of crummy backups, but I do kinda feel like it's worse than usual this camp. I think that’s more of a psycological thing with fans. I’d venture to guess most nfl fans, regardless of team, are uncomfortable with their team’s backups and feel their team is unique in that respect. Especially the better the starters at those spots are. I mean most people could not name the #3 or #4 OT’s for other teams, much less know how they are performing in relation to their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lodestar Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 I don't know much about OL play, but I assume part of it must also be the fact that it's preseason and we have a whole line of backups out there, right? Murphy obviously looked terrible, but in a real game, lined up alongside starters, with a game plan designed to help him, he's probably going to look better—right? I don't remember him being this bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatZepp Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 Just a nugget to expand on the spread offenses. kids just aren’t pushed to get that big anymore, now it is so much about speed that the high schooler who may have been pushed to bulk up and go to the offensive line is now being asked to lean and cut and put on the defense. I just don’t see the push for the elite physical players to try to make it as a tackle first. In high school and college it is put the best(most mobile) bigs on defense first and their careers are forever steered from o line would Watt, Cam Jordan, Calais Campbell be quality OT’s if that was the direction they were pushed towards since they were young? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnar Danneskjold Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 4 hours ago, packfanfb said: I disagree but I also think you're getting to a point I'm not trying to make. No one is saying drop Murphy and find a Bulaga on the street. I'm saying find a guy who's simply showing more consistency than Murphy. We don't need to "fix" tackle, we have two of the best and a "tolerable" third guy in Spriggs. We are talking about that last tackle spot. If your argument is that there isnt a guy out there now, let alone one who will be out there in a week from now, who wont be a more consistent improvement over Murphy at tackle, then you and I simply are not going to agree because that's not even a reasonable argument IMO. You tend to use a lot of straw man arguments. No one is saying that we are looking for Bulaga at cutdowns. Depth, league wide, is bad. If they are more consistent than Murphy, their current team will likely keep them. Disagree if you want. It doesn't change the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 36 minutes ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said: If they are more consistent than Murphy, their current team will likely keep them. Exactly.. How does this go over his head? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 2 hours ago, TransientTexan said: I think that’s more of a psycological thing with fans. I’d venture to guess most nfl fans, regardless of team, are uncomfortable with their team’s backups and feel their team is unique in that respect. Especially the better the starters at those spots are. I mean most people could not name the #3 or #4 OT’s for other teams, much less know how they are performing in relation to their own. Exactly if you could live 32 concurrent lives as a fan of every team, they wouldn't feel this way. There's an idea of what a roster should be, and then there's what they are. They are very different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted August 25, 2018 Share Posted August 25, 2018 37 minutes ago, Norm said: Exactly if you could live 32 concurrent lives as a fan of every team, they wouldn't feel this way. There's an idea of what a roster should be, and then there's what they are. They are very different. Sounds like you got it all figured out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted August 26, 2018 Share Posted August 26, 2018 MM so not breaking down Oakland film. Just saw him at Target East buying pool noodles with his daughters. He's shorter than I thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.