Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 495664">I did not misread anything; that's not what I said. I said he was "looking" at it. That means he's thinking about it, it is a possibility in his mind: "We're not doing anything like that right now," McCarthy said. "We've got to look at the draft and see what happens." In other words, it is a possibility, he's looking at it, as opposed to last off-season when it was only reporter speculation that was answered with a "no". I'm sorry if I seem impatient...that happens with me when dealing with people for whom English is a second language.</blockquote> Correct. I think it is unlikely Bulaga would work out at LT if they tried him there. However, any "trying" would take place after the draft.  I'm not sure if you read my entire post, but I was counting to 7. If they draft Q, or anybody else for that matter in the first 3 rounds, name your 7.  I did not say he'd be expected to start. I said he could start if he hit the top end of expectations. Barclay was not expected to be an NFL player, and here we are. Quite frankly, Newhouse sucks and is a one-position player; Sherrod may never take another NFL snap. There's not a high bar there. By the way, when MM dissed the left side of the line, he was talking about Newhouse. Lang had nothing to do with it. How do I know this? Because Newhouse sucks and Lang does not.  Newhouse was not much of a LT prospect either, so you probably should not be downgrading Q in this regard. Braclay, EDS? Not "starter material"; again, here we are. Besides, who says Q is not starter material? Some graded him out as the 3rd. best O-Lineman at the Senior Bowl. I would also note that in all measureables, Q and Fisher are indistinguishable with the exception that Fisher is 2" taller, which is not necessarily good. Barret Jones would likely require a higher pick.  I renounce any claim to thinking outside any box. People who use that expression typically don't know what they are talking about and I'd rather not be associated with them. There are reasons why that expression became passe about 10 years ago. So here's a secret I'll share with you...when you use that expression in the way you just used it, you come off as simultaneously patronizing and a little dim...that's not a good look.  See all of the above...then count to 7, count how many 1st. and 2nd. round picks we have, count the holes in the roster, and count the number of free agent starters we've signed. Dude...Q in an interesting idea, nothing more, nothing less. When I come up with something "outside the box" I'll let you know. If the Pack waits until the 5th. round, he'll be off the board and the matter will be moot.[/QUOTE]

Verification

Members online

No members online now.

Total: 51 (members: 0, guests: 51)

Latest posts

NFC North Predictions
- Latest: Calebs Revenge
- Yesterday at 11:27 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2025 Roster - Semi Live Thread
- Latest: gopkrs
- Yesterday at 11:15 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Transfer portal and NIL Money, how they have changed college sports".
- Latest: gopkrs
- Yesterday at 11:13 PM
College Sports
WNBA
- Latest: Voyageur
- Yesterday at 8:06 PM
All Other Sports
R
State of our former QB, Aaron Rodgers
- Latest: rmontro
- Yesterday at 5:27 PM
Aaron Rodgers Discusson