Mondays Try-Out

[A12ROD903]

According to ESPN and Packers.com, they brought in Tauscher for "try-outs" on monday. ESPN says to expect him starting by mid season. So with Clifton coming back from injury and the strong possibility that Tauscher is going to play again AND the OL players going back to their starting spot, Are things looking up for the line albeit the repair job is far from over???

:viksux:

 

[Packer 007]

This seems a like a panic move, which I can understand. I would think if they felt he would be better than what they had, they wouldn't have cut him in the first place. Tauscher may work out ok, but we'll see. There really is no where but up at this point, concerning the O-Line.

 

[weeds]

He wasn't cut. His contract expired and with a torn up knee, how can you justify tying up a roster spot?

I miss Tausher - I hope that he isn't rushed back too soon and ends up doing irreparable damage to that knee. Tausch used to host a Tuesday night hour on WBAY-TV in Green Bay and the kid is just sharp. This guy too is the epitome of a Green Bay Packer. Wisconsin born and reared, tough, no b.s. attitude ... just goes out and plays.

 

[MilwaukeePackFan]

I Hope That Tauscher Can Bring Something To The O-Line But **** Last Year He Was Getting Beat And Looked Bad Just Like They Look This Year. I Think It Would Help Hell Anything Would Help But Will They Become A Great O-Line I Highly Don't Think So. They Really Need New Players. They Can Draft O-Line Players But I Feel They Need Some Big Strong Experienced Players From A Trade Or Free Agency. With TED I Dont Think That Will Happen.

 

[Hauschild]

He wasn't cut. His contract expired and with a torn up knee, how can you justify tying up a roster spot?

Because anybody with any level of football IQ knew our offensive line was average at best, at least until they prove otherwise.

This is a no-brainer, even if Tausch is only 80%. He's got heart and intangibles that you cannot quantify easily.

What a shame that after 5 years of building up a pretty solid offense, TT scrimps on the most important cog after the QB - the offensive line. The problem now is even if he uses his 1st rounder in 2010 on an O-lineman, we'll still go thru a year of growing pains. Then we're into 2011. Driver isn't getting any younger. We still don't have a tier-1 RB. Rodgers getting abused certainly isn't going to extend his career. I think it's really an unfortunate situation and one I saw coming years ago.

 

[realoatesman]

Because anybody with any level of football IQ knew our offensive line was average at best, at least until they prove otherwise.

This is a no-brainer, even if Tausch is only 80%. He's got heart and intangibles that you cannot quantify easily.

What a shame that after 5 years of building up a pretty solid offense, TT scrimps on the most important cog after the QB - the offensive line. The problem now is even if he uses his 1st rounder in 2010 on an O-lineman, we'll still go thru a year of growing pains. Then we're into 2011. Driver isn't getting any younger. We still don't have a tier-1 RB. Rodgers getting abused certainly isn't going to extend his career. I think it's really an unfortunate situation and one I saw coming years ago.

The Packers doctor told TT and MM that he should be ready by October 1st. There was no point signing him before training camp because it would tie up a roster spot like weeds said. I think the decision was to wait until he was ready and see if he's needed on the O-Line...which he obviously is.

 

[Hauschild]

The Packers doctor told TT and MM that he should be ready by October 1st. There was no point signing him before training camp because it would tie up a roster spot like weeds said. I think the decision was to wait until he was ready and see if he's needed on the O-Line...which he obviously is.

That's nice for some, but it doesn't explain POOR play from the current starters. Surely, TT expected this group to thrive, or Tauscher would have been signed or contacted before yesterday - c'mon, guys, it's impossible to be that blindly naive.

I mean, it isn't just Tausch - we all knew Clifton was on his last legs, ya know? I mean Colledge was a 2nd round pick and he's barely serviceable as guard - he's certainly no LT.

Ah, it's just a mess that should have been cleaned up shortly after the end of the 2005 season. The problem is, Brett Favre made the line appear better than it was in 2006 and 2007, so that certainly didn't help. Thanks for nothing, Brett!:shock:

 

[doughsellz]

I was one of the doubters who thought there was no way Tauscher was brought back for any reason simply because it was time for Barbre to get his chance. If all things between Tausch & Barbre are equal, maybe even a little swayed toward Tausch, TT would still give the nod to Barbre because he's got more upside, youth & health. See the #4 sitch last season for precedent.

To a lesser degree the Wells/Spitz decision played out similarily. It was time for Sitton to play & the negligible difference between Wells & Spitz' performance at C meant that Wells was better served as Spitz' back-up in order to get Sitton, the OG of the future into the lineup.

IMHO bringing in Tausch for the workout is merely TT using due diligence as required by his GM position. On a personal level I'm thinking that in TT's mind there's still no way Barbre loses reps to Tausch. He may be signed for insurance now that Blackmon's roster spot is vacated but that's about as far as it will go, barring injury to Barbre.

I'm still amazed that TT didn't keep 10 O-lineman instead of 6 RBs. The 3 FBs were supposed to add depth to ST, so why was Quinn Johnson deactivated against MN?:dontknow:

 

[PackersRS]

That's nice for some, but it doesn't explain POOR play from the current starters. Surely, TT expected this group to thrive, or Tauscher would have been signed or contacted before yesterday - c'mon, guys, it's impossible to be that blindly naive.

I mean, it isn't just Tausch - we all knew Clifton was on his last legs, ya know? I mean Colledge was a 2nd round pick and he's barely serviceable as guard - he's certainly no LT.

Ah, it's just a mess that should have been cleaned up shortly after the end of the 2005 season. The problem is, Brett Favre made the line appear better than it was in 2006 and 2007, so that certainly didn't help. Thanks for nothing, Brett!:shock:

Tauscher and Clifton will make this line a lot better. But, like you said, that doesn't change the fact that we have only 1 replacement for them (Lang seems like the real deal), but the other positions are a mess.

We started as a ZBS with Jags, and started bringing in guys that would fit that scheme. But then he left, and there was noone to teach it. So we have guys that are only fit to the ZBS, but they don't have a clue to how to play it.

 

[Agent_Nothing]

Some interesting opinions everyone. I have to agree that Tausch and Clifton (at 100%) are a huge addition to our line. It's just that they aren't 100%. I truly hope that the OLine can pull it together, Rodgers just can't scramble as fast as some.

 

[GoPackGo!]

I would think if they felt he would be better than what they had, they wouldn't have cut him in the first place.

Cut Tauscher? They didn't. Tauscher got hurt late into last season and then his contract expired so the Pack didn't resign him right away because they didn't know how rehab would go. A panic move? Yes I agree it is a panic move. But if he is better than Barbre then that is ok with me.

 

[Jess]

I like that they're doing SOMETHING. I would've had my money on TT not making a single move and smugly telling the public that he knows what he's doing.

 

[bad93ex]

Have they signed him yet? I dont see anything about it on ESPN.

 

[DILLIGAFF]

After seeing the game in person, I think the real problem with the O-line is the QB. Bret just has the experience and gets the ball out faster. Look at Drew B. of the Saints, his first few years in the league did not look good. Now he gets that ball out sooner and look at the results. Bret had the same kind of O-line and went 13-3. We are just going through growing pains with A-rod. This is not saying we can't improve the O-line, but the major drop off in the O-line play is the QB

 

[PackersRS]

After seeing the game in person, I think the real problem with the O-line is the QB. Bret just has the experience and gets the ball out faster. Look at Drew B. of the Saints, his first few years in the league did not look good. Now he gets that ball out sooner and look at the results. Bret had the same kind of O-line and went 13-3. We are just going through growing pains with A-rod. This is not saying we can't improve the O-line, but the major drop off in the O-line play is the QB

That is just not true... Cheeseheadtv.com has a lot of great insights about this issue. There are some sacks that it's just Rodgers holding the ball too long, that's true. But he's been getting sacked in 3 step drops, even before he can set his foot. And it's not Rodgers' fault that the line has created zero holes for the running game. You can say that Favre made them look serviceable, but not that it's Rodgers' fault that they suck.

 

[bad93ex]

After seeing the game in person, I think the real problem with the O-line is the QB. Bret just has the experience and gets the ball out faster. Look at Drew B. of the Saints, his first few years in the league did not look good. Now he gets that ball out sooner and look at the results. Bret had the same kind of O-line and went 13-3. We are just going through growing pains with A-rod. This is not saying we can't improve the O-line, but the major drop off in the O-line play is the QB

I agree with PackerRS in that most of the blame falls on the o-line creating holes or giving more time to the QB. We will see if they have improved on Nov. 1st.

 

[GoPackGo!]

Have they signed him yet? I dont see anything about it on ESPN.

I would go to the Packers.com, the Official Web site of the Green Bay Packers. website because the ESPN website is sports in general and the packers website tells you exactly what you need to know right on the home page.

 

[longtimefan]

After seeing the game in person, I think the real problem with the O-line is the QB. Bret just has the experience and gets the ball out faster. Look at Drew B. of the Saints, his first few years in the league did not look good. Now he gets that ball out sooner and look at the results. Bret had the same kind of O-line and went 13-3. We are just going through growing pains with A-rod. This is not saying we can't improve the O-line, but the major drop off in the O-line play is the QB

WOW :blind:

Brett had this same o-l in 07?

This was the starting line for the NFCCG

LT-Clify
LG-Colledge
C-Wells
RG-Spitz
RT-Mark Tauch

2 of those guys were not the starters vs Minny...The 2? Tauch and Cliffy the TACKLES

Nice try!

 

[Hauschild]

This was the starting line for the NFCCG

LT-Clify
LG-Colledge
C-Wells
RG-Spitz
RT-Mark Tauch

Yeah - the same line that netted a whopping 27 yards rushing during the NFCCG; the same line that Brett went 13-3 under and Rodgers 6-10.

I think it's safe to say at this point based on games played the last several years that Rodgers needs a bit more support on the O-line front. Rodgers is a solid QB in his own right, but what makes him succeed and what Brett needed to succeed are different animals. Rodgers is great at taking what a defense gives him, whereas Brett is great at exposing a defense's aggression. If there appears to be no play, Rodgers will take a sack. On the other hand, Brett will take a chance to avoid the sack - most of the time it did not result in an interception and many times it resulted in play where yards were gained.

So, in any particular game, let's say Brett makes 3-5 more plays than Rodgers, which can be a combination of completed passes and not taking a sack. Multiply that by 16 games and that's a significant number of additional plays Brett can make and I would argue is the difference between 11-5 and 8-8 - even if you factor in Brett tossing (1) additional interception per game.

So, we'll get Clifton back which certainly will help. Again, the problem I then see is that the "real" problem will get masked and possibly not addressed to the extent it may need to next year.

I often hear the phrase about putting your players in the best position to be successful. In order to do that for Rodgers, he needs a solid pass-protecting and run-blocking O-line. It's pretty evident that TT erred when he thought Rodgers could meet or beat Brett's productivity with the same O-line - that is not the case. We can either argue this for the next 5 years, or face the music.

 

[longtimefan]

Yeah - the same line that netted a whopping 27 yards rushing during the NFCCG; the same line that Brett went 13-3 under and Rodgers 6-10.

I think it's safe to say at this point based on games played the last several years that Rodgers needs a bit more support on the O-line front. Rodgers is a solid QB in his own right, but what makes him succeed and what Brett needed to succeed are different animals. Rodgers is great at taking what a defense gives him, whereas Brett is great at exposing a defense's aggression. If there appears to be no play, Rodgers will take a sack. On the other hand, Brett will take a chance to avoid the sack - most of the time it did not result in an interception and many times it resulted in play where yards were gained.

So, in any particular game, let's say Brett makes 3-5 more plays than Rodgers, which can be a combination of completed passes and not taking a sack. Multiply that by 16 games and that's a significant number of additional plays Brett can make and I would argue is the difference between 11-5 and 8-8 - even if you factor in Brett tossing (1) additional interception per game.

So, we'll get Clifton back which certainly will help. Again, the problem I then see is that the "real" problem will get masked and possibly not addressed to the extent it may need to next year.

I often hear the phrase about putting your players in the best position to be successful. In order to do that for Rodgers, he needs a solid pass-protecting and run-blocking O-line. It's pretty evident that TT erred when he thought Rodgers could meet or beat Brett's productivity with the same O-line - that is not the case. We can either argue this for the next 5 years, or face the music.

So a guy with only 20 starts under his belt is suppose to perform as well as a hof q/b?

I am not getting in the Brett should be here, HE ISNT

However to say that Rodgers is suppose to perform on the same level if not BETTER than Brett is just crazy...

I hope your not saying that?

 

[PackersRS]

Yeah - the same line that netted a whopping 27 yards rushing during the NFCCG; the same line that Brett went 13-3 under and Rodgers 6-10.

I think it's safe to say at this point based on games played the last several years that Rodgers needs a bit more support on the O-line front. Rodgers is a solid QB in his own right, but what makes him succeed and what Brett needed to succeed are different animals. Rodgers is great at taking what a defense gives him, whereas Brett is great at exposing a defense's aggression. If there appears to be no play, Rodgers will take a sack. On the other hand, Brett will take a chance to avoid the sack - most of the time it did not result in an interception and many times it resulted in play where yards were gained.

So, in any particular game, let's say Brett makes 3-5 more plays than Rodgers, which can be a combination of completed passes and not taking a sack. Multiply that by 16 games and that's a significant number of additional plays Brett can make and I would argue is the difference between 11-5 and 8-8 - even if you factor in Brett tossing (1) additional interception per game.

So, we'll get Clifton back which certainly will help. Again, the problem I then see is that the "real" problem will get masked and possibly not addressed to the extent it may need to next year.

I often hear the phrase about putting your players in the best position to be successful. In order to do that for Rodgers, he needs a solid pass-protecting and run-blocking O-line. It's pretty evident that TT erred when he thought Rodgers could meet or beat Brett's productivity with the same O-line - that is not the case. We can either argue this for the next 5 years, or face the music.

Well, I'm not necessarily diverging from what you said, but it comes with experience. Favre has 18 seasons in his belt. Rodgers has 1. He clearly has the skills and the intangibles to be an elite qb. Payton Manning wasn't making magic while in his first years. Eli only panned out in the playoffs of 2007. Before that, he was being booed by his fans, and playing A LOT worse than Rodgers. And look at him now, look at how he's playing with the Giants. IMHO he should've beeing considered for MVP.

 

[Hauschild]

Well, I'm not necessarily diverging from what you said, but it comes with experience. Favre has 18 seasons in his belt. Rodgers has 1. He clearly has the skills and the intangibles to be an elite qb. Payton Manning wasn't making magic while in his first years. Eli only panned out in the playoffs of 2007. Before that, he was being booed by his fans, and playing A LOT worse than Rodgers. And look at him now, look at how he's playing with the Giants. IMHO he should've beeing considered for MVP.

Good point, but I'm not convinced I'd continue to neglect the O-line and assume Rodgers will eventually be able to overcome sub-par pass protection and run blocking - not that I am accusing you of this, mind you.

 

[Hauschild]

So a guy with only 20 starts under his belt is suppose to perform as well as a hof q/b?

I am not getting in the Brett should be here, HE ISNT

However to say that Rodgers is suppose to perform on the same level if not BETTER than Brett is just crazy...

I hope your not saying that?

Well, what I am saying is that it appears TT believed Rodgers would perform as well or better. If this were not the case, then he would have addressed the O-line with a bit more vigilance. Or, maybe TT was aware and is willing to write off another season.

 

[PackersRS]

Good point, but I'm not convinced I'd continue to neglect the O-line and assume Rodgers will eventually be able to overcome sub-par pass protection and run blocking - not that I am accusing you of this, mind you.

Thank God, because I'm saying quite the opposite. I'm saying fix this freking OL now before we definitely lose our season when Rodgers goes down. And also saying that it's an unrefutable proof of TT's incompetence the current state of the OL, a vital part for a team's sucess. I'm not calling for a Hogs OL, or even a current Giants OL either. I'm talking about one that'll allow our playmakers on O to suceed. That's not much to ask, and not difficult to do. Other 25 teams in the league have done it.

 

[PackersRS]

Well, what I am saying is that it appears TT believed Rodgers would perform as well or better. If this were not the case, then he would have addressed the O-line with a bit more vigilance. Or, maybe TT was aware and is willing to write off another season.

Call MM on that one. But I don't think they knew they had a terrible OL. I don't think that's the case. They may knew that Barbre wasn't ready, and were willing to wait for Tauscher. I think they thought they could do with this OL, or with this OL + Tauscher back. Evaluation error, IMHO.