ChaRisMa Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 Kinda disappointed by the numbers, but it fills a need beyond this year. Another Ted gem UDFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadmus Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 2 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said: You responded to me saying that in the first post of this thread. You think I was referring to talk about this thread in the first post of this thread? That makes no sense, and regardless of whether or not I'm looking like an idiot arguing against high interior offensive linemen here, how do you think you look by saying nobody in this thread is saying that when I said they were saying that in the first post of this thread? How does that make any sense? Hint: It doesn't, and I was referring to a different thread. Obviously. Continuing to make yourself look less than stellar. I'm guessing you don't recall how many OL threads I started in the months leading up to the draft. OL on the first 2 days of the NFL Draft didn't have the massive following that your imagination believes it did... especially after NFL Combine. Once people realized there were very few Packers-type OL in the draft class any talk of Day 1 or Day 2 pretty much died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 26 minutes ago, Cadmus said: Continuing to make yourself look less than stellar. I'm guessing you don't recall how many OL threads I started in the months leading up to the draft. OL on the first 2 days of the NFL Draft didn't have the massive following that your imagination believes it did... especially after NFL Combine. Once people realized there were very few Packers-type OL in the draft class any talk of Day 1 or Day 2 pretty much died. Wasn't the OL talk before the draft mostly just, "If the board completely falls apart we could take Forrest Lamp?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 The first rule of Italian driving is: Whatsa behind me, its not important... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 Just now, Cadmus said: Continuing to make yourself look less than stellar. I'm guessing you don't recall how many OL threads I started in the months leading up to the draft. You're continuing to make yourself look like a weirdo who's suggesting things I'm not saying. When did I mention last year? Where did you even come up with that? There were literally three people at least that were arguing that we probably should and probably would take an interior offensive lineman in the first three rounds in the 2018 NFL Draft Discussion. Are you trying to tell me that there aren't people arguing whether or not we're going to take an interior offensive lineman in the draft discussion thread? Wherever you're getting this notion that I'm suggesting dozens of people are talking about it I'd like to know. But whatever. You must've had a bad day, and I'm an easy target, so you go ahead and get them likes. You deserve them, and I'm sure you'll get them from TheOnlyThing and a few others who hate me on here anytime you call me out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 13 hours ago, DavidatMIZZOU said: Wasn't the OL talk before the draft mostly just, "If the board completely falls apart we could take Forrest Lamp?" I thought that was what @justo was saying...I might be wrong though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted September 5, 2017 Share Posted September 5, 2017 OL guru Ben Muth at Football Outsiders will be covering the Packers OL this year. Each season he picks a couple of OL's and writes about them all season long Should be some high quality analysis for us, his column is called "Word of Muth" http://www.footballoutsiders.com/word-muth/2017/word-muth-2017-preview Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{Family Ghost} Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 Fat guy in a little uniform! Also has a resemblence to Matt Foley in this pose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 I remember the love for Forrest Lamp on the old site. There were more than a couple convinced he would be BPA. Some said he was Zach Martin all over again. Not that it has much to do with Lane Taylor and his extension. My point is this...what a great kid. UDFA who was awful. Terrible. And he progressed every year in GB. If only other guys would progress as he did. I swear he gets more out of his God given ability than most and that is a testament to his character and to the staff in GB. If you show you are willing to work, they will work hard with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driftwood Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 Lane Taylor's 2016 production reduced the need to worry about losing Sitton... that alone made his extension worthwhile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 On 9/4/2017 at 9:56 PM, ChaRisMa said: Kinda disappointed by the numbers, but it fills a need beyond this year. Another Ted gem UDFA. @ChaRisMa can you elaborate on the numbers and what is disappointing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driftwood Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 23 minutes ago, squire12 said: @ChaRisMa can you elaborate on the numbers and what is disappointing? I think I can help... Charisma is a little down that the packers didnt lock him up to a 3 year 3 mill (1mill per year) deal in short, there is nothing wrong with the deal that Lane got assuming hes the player we saw in 2016 for the next 3 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaRisMa Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 5 hours ago, driftwood said: I think I can help... Charisma is a little down that the packers didnt lock him up to a 3 year 3 mill (1mill per year) deal in short, there is nothing wrong with the deal that Lane got assuming hes the player we saw in 2016 for the next 3 years Pretty much, yeah. We got value for him. It's not a bad deal. It's not a good deal. I was really hopeful to get under 4 Mil a year for Taylor to help keep Linsley in that ballpark too. Wouldve been sweet to get both Linsley AND Taylor for less than one of either Lang or Sitton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 15 hours ago, squire12 said: @ChaRisMa can you elaborate on the numbers and what is disappointing? Pretty much got fair market value, which given the Packers history of being able to get players to take discounts. The Bucs just gave J.R. Sweezy a 4 year, $21.75M ($2.5M SB, $6.25M guaranteed) as a comparable deal. Lane Taylor got a bigger signing bonus. Decent deal, but it's not a great deal by any means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 15 hours ago, ChaRisMa said: Pretty much, yeah. We got value for him. It's not a bad deal. It's not a good deal. I was really hopeful to get under 4 Mil a year for Taylor to help keep Linsley in that ballpark too. Wouldve been sweet to get both Linsley AND Taylor for less than one of either Lang or Sitton. 3 I'd like to be wrong on this, but regardless of the Taylor deal, I never had any expectation that Linsley could be signed to a 4M/YR deal when Tretter just signed a contract for 5.5M/YR. I expect the Tretter deal is the absolute floor for any deal Linsley agrees to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.