Bulaga reportedly sign with the Packers

D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
I'm not suggesting, I'm stating that it's a fact that a before average oline is no barrier to a Super Bowl. How could anyone believe you need a good oline to win a Super Bowl when the Pats just won with a below average oline, the Giants won two recent Super Bowls with below average olines and the Seahawks oline last year wasn't great either?

The Packers don´t need a great offensive line to win the Super Bowl but a healthy Aaron Rodgers. And I would feel way more comfortable with Bulaga protecting our franchise QB on the right side.
 

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,209
Reaction score
1,664
So weird how all these crap teams with way too much extra money have to find some people to overpay. Seems like something wrong with the system there. Locking bottom feeders into bad contracts isn't exactly going to help them.
The system design is very good imo. The problem is..... You can't fix stupid.
IMO, a quarter of the NFL teams are run by people who aren't suited for this enterprise.
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,461
Reaction score
595
The system design is very good imo. The problem is..... You can't fix stupid.
IMO, a quarter of the NFL teams are run by people who aren't suited for this enterprise.

Don't know about the numbers, but the concept is spot on. In any enterprise, there are people who end up in charge and shouldn't be there, be it the Peter Principle, nepotism, or something else. Always annoys me when the sole comeback to criticizing a GM, coach, scout, analyst or what have you is "so you think you know better than a guy who gets paid to ____?".
 

Uncle Rico

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 9, 2015
Messages
52
Reaction score
3
I'm not suggesting, I'm stating that it's a fact that a before average oline is no barrier to a Super Bowl. How could anyone believe you need a good oline to win a Super Bowl when the Pats just won with a below average oline, the Giants won two recent Super Bowls with below average olines and the Seahawks oline last year wasn't great either?

They won DESPITE having bad olines, not because of it. It may not be a barrier to super bowls, but a hobbled up Aaron Rodgers certainly would be. One missed block can really mess up a season for a team built around and reliant on their quarterback.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
They won DESPITE having bad olines, not because of it. It may not be a barrier to super bowls, but a hobbled up Aaron Rodgers certainly would be. One missed block can really mess up a season for a team built around and reliant on their quarterback.


You're right. I never said they won because they had bad lines. I'm simply stating that having a below average oline is no barrier to a Super Bowl when you have a good QB. So, that being said, keeping the oline intact isn't going to determine the Packers' ability to win a Super Bowl (intact from a free agency perspective).
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,748
Reaction score
4,784
And the Ravens won their SB despite having truly no elite wideout.....or some would argue an elite QB. Just sayin'
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,959
Reaction score
1,235
The system design is very good imo. The problem is..... You can't fix stupid.
IMO, a quarter of the NFL teams are run by people who aren't suited for this enterprise.


I like the way it is structured as well. It is funny that it seems the only way some of these teams can attract FAs is to offer them way more money than they are worth otherwise the players take less to play elsewhere. Oops, I guess I should say they are reported to take less to play elsewhere because we all know players don't really do that.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,959
Reaction score
1,235
Cobb and Bulaga are really different situations. Bulaga first off is the top FA at his position which already starts him off with an inflated market.

In addition, though they are similar in age and career point, Cobb being a skilled WR does make a difference. There are rational arguments that can be made that Cobb can take less money in Green Bay now and still come out ahead in the long run with his next deal with Aaron Rodgers throwing to him for the next 4 years instead of Carr, Tanehill, or Bortles. The same argument can't really be made for Bulaga, whose next payday is much less affected by his QB. That doesn't make it impossible that Bulaga will take less to stay, but he's got a stronger argument for taking the best deal now and I think he probably will.

What you say is true (although lots of people had Cobb as the top wideout available as well) and it may explain why he might take the highest offer or why he might be foolish not to but AKC said he had to take the highest offer NOW. I was simply pointing out that he didn't have to. Assuming he has earned his entire rookie contract he has earned over 13 million dollars thus far in his career. Even by signing a lower offer with the Packers he will most likely see another 6-10 million on top of that (signing bonus plus 1st year salary) plus a lot more if he stays injury free and keeps producing. That may be enough for him. On top of that if he does stay healthy ( I know, big if) and produces at a high level he will be set to cash in again in another 3-4 years.

He does already have a ring so a championship may not be as big of a factor as it was with Cobb so that may work against us.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
You're right. I never said they won because they had bad lines. I'm simply stating that having a below average oline is no barrier to a Super Bowl when you have a good QB. So, that being said, keeping the oline intact isn't going to determine the Packers' ability to win a Super Bowl (intact from a free agency perspective).

The offensive line is responsible for keeping that great QB healthy though.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,795
well let's hope they get something done. Like I mentioned before, he proved to me at least, that he belongs here
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,748
Reaction score
4,784

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
3,152
Reaction score
575
6 mil a year way too much for house glad he's gone at that price we could be in line for a nice compensatory pick in 2016. Need to get williams and Bulaga locked up now though. Both are above avg NFL starters and really can't ask for much more than that. Bulaga would likely sign for 5 years 30-35 million and williams 2 years 10 million. Bulaga maybe a little expensive but good bargain for williams. He's got the ball skills that you apparently can't teach( ask d house)
 

HaHa'sRightGlove

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
46
Reaction score
1
Location
London, UK
Reports saying a deal is going to be done; hopefully no smoke without fire. Would be a successful off-season to keep the core of the team together.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
13,748
Reaction score
4,784
Everyone stop posting same stuff.....no one post now unless it is done :) I keep getting excited everytime I see a post.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
The offensive line is responsible for keeping that great QB healthy though.


And yet Rodgers survived with Newhouse at LT and other QBs have survived with porous lines. Coaches can give help to a weaker tackle either through chips/double teams/roll outs/etc. Finally, Rodgers reads defenses and gets rid of the ball very quickly now; while giving up an additional 3 sacks and ten hits with a weaker tackle would increase Rodgers odds of getting hurt, I'm not sure it's a gigantic increase, or even a material increase.
 

andeftw

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
43
Reaction score
4
And yet Rodgers survived with Newhouse at LT and other QBs have survived with porous lines. Coaches can give help to a weaker tackle either through chips/double teams/roll outs/etc. Finally, Rodgers reads defenses and gets rid of the ball very quickly now; while giving up an additional 3 sacks and ten hits with a weaker tackle would increase Rodgers odds of getting hurt, I'm not sure it's a gigantic increase, or even a material increase.

Actually I got the opposite feeling this year. It could be the eye test that is fooling me, but he seemed to hold onto the ball for quite some time before going to his check-down.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top