Jerron McMillian Released

[Carl]

^
^
The Packer OL has allowed 32 sacks and our QB's to be hit 58 times. It is ranked 18th based on that. God knows how many times Rodgers avoided more of this based on his Houdini escapes. I don't consider their performance Solid. Check out the definition of solid.

Pass protection isn't the only factor involved with the 0-line. Three different backs don't go for over 100 yards with a poor o-line. There are consistently big holes to run through.

Average pass protection plus really good run blocking is solid to me.

 

[yooperpackfan]

Pass protection isn't the only factor involved with the 0-line. Three different backs don't go for over 100 yards with a poor o-line. There are consistently big holes to run through.

Average pass protection plus really good run blocking is solid to me.

" consistently big holes to run through", are you serious?
What team are you watching?
For the last 8 years Packers running backs have made some yards in spite of the O-line.
If the O-line was truly solid, we would have more 100 yard games and not be in the bottom half of the league in pass protection.
In case you forgot, Rodgers was sacked 53 times last year and that was with the "great" Bulaga on the field most of the time.
Bhaktiari and Barclay show promise, Sitton is pretty damn good, EDS is doing a pretty fair job considering this is his 1st year as a full time starter at center. Sherrod is a 1st round pick but we don't know what he can do.
Now EDS has sprained his ankle which probably leads to musical chairs again.
Solid, hardly. But that's just MHO.

 

[13 Times Champs]

Pass protection isn't the only factor involved with the 0-line. Three different backs don't go for over 100 yards with a poor o-line. There are consistently big holes to run through.

Average pass protection plus really good run blocking is solid to me.

What Yooper said. Seriously do you consider a back getting 100 yards 3 times the measure of a solid offensive line. Once again I ask you to review the definition of the word solid. Here's one for you for you:


" Having no gaps or breaks; continuous: a solid line of people."

 

[Carl]

" consistently big holes to run through", are you serious?
What team are you watching?
For the last 8 years Packers running backs have made some yards in spite of the O-line.
If the O-line was truly solid, we would have more 100 yard games and not be in the bottom half of the league in pass protection.
In case you forgot, Rodgers was sacked 53 times last year and that was with the "great" Bulaga on the field most of the time.
Bhaktiari and Barclay show promise, Sitton is pretty damn good, EDS is doing a pretty fair job considering this is his 1st year as a full time starter at center. Sherrod is a 1st round pick but we don't know what he can do.
Now EDS has sprained his ankle which probably leads to musical chairs again.
Solid, hardly. But that's just MHO.

I'm not talking about last season. I'm saying this season. Did you guys not watch the Bears game? Lacy and Starks both had big holes on long runs I could have ran through, even though the box was stacked. Franklin had over 100 yards in about a half in another. The Packers averaged 5.8 yards a rush against Minnesota again with a stacked box. Lacy was breaking tackles, but not until he was few yards downfield. Starks, who has proven to not be spectacular, had large running lanes against the Redskins. Those do not happen with poor run blocking.

Many yards in spite of the o-line? The Packers have not had a good running game in years.

A team doesn't have a really good running game without good running blocking period.

What Yooper said. Seriously do you consider a back getting 100 yards 3 times the measure of a solid offensive line. Once again I ask you to review the definition of the word solid. Here's one for you for you:

" Having no gaps or breaks; continuous: a solid line of people."

You do realize there is more than one definition, right? That definition clearly does not fit here. This one does: "sound but without any special qualities or flair." Average pass blocking and really good run blocking is sound to me. And like I said before, their stats would be higher if Flynn didn't just sit in the pocket against Detroit and step up.

And I said three DIFFERENT backs. If three different guys can go in and be successful, the line is playing well.

 

[13 Times Champs]

You do realize there is more than one definition, right? That definition clearly does not fit here. This one does: "sound but without any special qualities or flair." Average pass blocking and really good run blocking is sound to me. And like I said before, their stats would be higher if Flynn didn't just sit in the pocket against Detroit and step up.

And I said three DIFFERENT backs. If three different guys can go in and be successful, the line is playing well.

You have a very liberal definition of Solid. The Packer OL is below average in pass and run blocking. Also, it incurs a lot of holding penalties. Check on the number of bad OL's that have three one hundred yard rushers. It doesn't matter that they were different runners. Lacy has made a lot of his own holes. All we can say about this OL is that it is better than last year. It's a work in progress at this point. Solid not.

 

[Carl]

You have a very liberal definition of Solid. The Packer OL is below average in pass and run blocking. Also, it incurs a lot of holding penalties. Check on the number of bad OL's that have three one hundred yard rushers. It doesn't matter that they were different runners. Lacy has made a lot of his own holes. All we can say about this OL is that it is better than last year. It's a work in progress at this point. Solid not.

I do not think it's possible for a team to have a good running game and run the ball well with whomever the running back is with below average run blocking, but looks like we'll disagree.

You can't tell me they weren't good in the games I've pointed out at least. They were also in the top 10 in sacks allowed before the Thanksgiving game. One bad game makes the rest of the season seem a lot worse.

 

[13 Times Champs]

I do not think it's possible for a team to have a good running game and run the ball well with whomever the running back is with below average run blocking, but looks like we'll disagree.

You can't tell me they weren't good in the games I've pointed out at least.

Minny 23 in rushing defense, Washington 14 (and they were horrible when we played them).

 

[Carl]

Minny 23 in rushing defense, Washington 14 (and they were horrible when we played them).

How about the good games against the 3rd ranked Lions (the first game), 5th ranked Browns, 6th ranked Ravens, and 8th ranked Bengals rush defenses?

Teams don't become good at running the ball without good run blocking.

 

[13 Times Champs]

How about the good games against the 3rd ranked Lions (the first game), 5th ranked Browns, 6th ranked Ravens, and 8th ranked Bengals rush defenses?

Teams don't become good at running the ball without good run blocking.

So we had a 100 yards per game rusher against all those teams. I gotta check this out!!

 

[Carl]

So we had a 100 yards per game rusher against all those teams. I gotta check this out!!

Almost, if you count Lacy's 99 against Lions. I wasn't pointing out 100 yard rushers though. I was saying they've had success against good rush defenses too. Don't do that with a poor run blocking.

 

[13 Times Champs]

Almost, if you count Lacy's 99 against Lions. I wasn't pointing out 100 yard rushers though. I was saying they've had success against good rush defenses too. Don't do that with a poor run blocking.

And I was responding to your # 54 post. A good running back can run behind poor Ol's. There are many examples.

 

[Carl]

And I was responding to your # 54 post. A good running back can run behind poor Ol's. There are many examples.

And there are also many examples of the opposite. Looks like we can agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Sunshine885500]

Sean Richardson - DB - Packers
ESPN Packers blogger Rob Demovsky expects S Sean Richardson to see "even more playing time" this week and down the stretch.
We haven't had an update on Richardson since October, when it was revealed that he could continue his playing career after undergoing fusion surgery on his neck late last season. Richardson has appeared in the past two games, playing 22 snaps. The Packers are looking for a safety to play next to Morgan Burnett. M.D. Jennings and Chris Banjo have been liabilities on the back end.

 

[Carl]

Sean Richardson - DB - Packers
ESPN Packers blogger Rob Demovsky expects S Sean Richardson to see "even more playing time" this week and down the stretch.
We haven't had an update on Richardson since October, when it was revealed that he could continue his playing career after undergoing fusion surgery on his neck late last season. Richardson has appeared in the past two games, playing 22 snaps. The Packers are looking for a safety to play next to Morgan Burnett. M.D. Jennings and Chris Banjo have been liabilities on the back end.

There's no way he can be any worse than McMillian so that's a plus.

 

[Sunshine885500]

Much better size and he can Tackle