1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

O-Line Concerns and how the coaching change will help

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by tromadz, Aug 9, 2006.

  1. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Almost everyone is concerned about the o-line, and more recently the injury to Chad Clifton and how the LT position will be handled.

    One thing to keep in mind, is to NOT focus on last year and how favre was destroyed almost every pass play. Sherman did a lot of stupid things, and one of the worst was when he would play empty backfields on pass plays, or have the blocker run a route. That was just stupid. If anything, there should have been more blockers for favre (in the backfield,TE,etc)

    and that is what I think McCarthy is smart enough to do. If he sees a weakness(LT) he will not let it be exploited. He will have a blocker for favre, and wont sacrifice him with empty backfields like sherman did.

    I just wanted to say this. Thank you.

    (btw clifton is back)
    (but spitz appears to be hurt :( )
     
  2. IndiPack

    IndiPack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    76
    Ratings:
    +0
    Rookie guard Spitz suffers leg injury
    Associated Press

    GREEN BAY, Wis. - "The injury bug that has depleted the Green Bay Packers' offensive line early in training camp bit a little harder Tuesday.

    Rookie guard Jason Spitz sustained what head coach Mike McCarthy classified afterward as a bruised lower right leg.

    "I don't know if he got kicked or got rolled up on," McCarthy said.

    The injury occurred in a team drill about 90 minutes into the 2 1/2-hour afternoon practice, the team's lone workout of the day. Spitz watched the rest of the practice with a big ice pack wrapped on his shin.

    McCarthy said Spitz was to have the leg examined after practice to determine the severity of the injury and how much time, if any, the third-round draft pick would miss.

    Spitz has held the starting spot at right guard since the first day of training camp July 28.

    "Any offensive lineman we lose at this point is a tough loss because we're already a little thin at spots," said rookie left guard Daryn Colledge, who is Spitz's roommate during camp. "Jason is a tough guy. He hasn't missed a lot of time (in the past). I'm sure he'll bounce right back."

    Fourth-year player Tupe Peko, whom the Packers signed as a free agent July 28, replaced Spitz with the starting group.

    Junius Coston opened camp as a challenger to Spitz for the starting job. Coston, though, was moved to left tackle Thursday to fill in for an injured Chad Clifton.

    Clifton aggravated his surgically repaired right knee July 30 and was out until Monday night. Clifton practiced again Tuesday but split reps with Coston.

    McCarthy wouldn't say whether moving Coston back to right guard would be an option if Spitz has to miss an extended period of time.

    "I'm not ready to talk about that. I'm not even sure the extent of (Spitz's) injury," McCarthy said.

    The Packers lost Kevin Barry, their top backup lineman, to a season-ending ruptured quadriceps tendon in a May minicamp. Veteran Adrian Klemm, who started eight games at left guard last season and was backing up Clifton, suffered a season-ending torn Achilles' tendon on the second day of training camp.

    McCarthy disclosed Tuesday that Will Whitticker, who worked a bit at left tackle in Clifton's absence, has a strained right hamstring. Whitticker suffered the injury Friday.

    "It's going to be a while. I'm not sure how long," McCarthy said of Whitticker's unavailability.

    Whitticker started 14 games at right guard as a rookie last season."

    lower leg, my bad on earlier report.
     
  3. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    (why is this posted twice? the packerforum.com ghosts are at it again)
     
  4. IndiPack

    IndiPack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    76
    Ratings:
    +0
    Can do it 3 times if necessary. (See Hawk thread.)
     
  5. arrowgargantuan

    arrowgargantuan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    3,645
    Ratings:
    +4
    thats odd...never seen that before.
     
  6. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Everytime you use an extra blocker you lose a receiver option. The problem with the O-line is this.

    We need to establish a run game to open up the pass game. We failed to do that last year. It has little to do with leaving extra guys back. The problem throwing the ball was that we faced quite a few Defenses that did not FEAR our run game whatsoever, thus they didn't need to bring extra guys up.


    Thisteam needs to re-establish the run game and then, and only then, will the passing game that we are used to return.
     
  7. Bobby Roberts

    Bobby Roberts Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    770
    Ratings:
    +0
    Unless MM goes totally back to the Holmgren offense of the '90s. Back then GB was using screens and short passes as the running game essentially. This opened up WRs and bigger plays. With Green, this changed to be a real running game.

    It appears that MM use a mixture of running, screens and short passes to open up defenses. Of course that's only speculation until the season starts.

    As for the original topic, the OL is a huge concern!! We need more than an extra blocker in the backfield to fix the OL problems.

    3 positions have new players this year. Clifton has been injured and no one healthy is capable of filling in. We're going to go through rookie struggles, praying that Wells won't throw a shotgun snap away from Favre, and praying that no one else gets hurt along with guys healing quickly.

    The OL was the reason our offense struggled last season. This is the main reason that we lost so many games -- most by only a few points. If it comes together, then we will be a playoff team. Otherwise we will finish as all the "experts" are predicting.
     
  8. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    yeah but the holmgren thing didnt work out....oh wait...

    you cant be positive here, bobby roberts, some people just wont allow it.
     
  9. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    From the other thread:

    I don't think the coaching change is as important as the new strength and conditioning approach. Don't get me wrong, the difference in McCarthy and Sherman should definitely be important, but I think the new training will allow the players more strength and freshness later into the season. That in itself will have a great effect on blocking.

    As for the weaknesses, I think Jags will handle that dept. If he thinks LT is a problem, I have a feeling Jags will be crazy enough to try something that seems out of this world. Perhaps have more switched matchups, where the LG and LT switch the area they are responsible for blocking. (not swtich positions, but rather have the G and T slant towards the other to block) I also think if they think it is a major issue, they will simply put in another player.
     
  10. Lare

    Lare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    705
    Ratings:
    +0
    Personally, the worst thing I think Sherman did last year was play musical chairs with the offensive linemen through the entire preseason and even during the season. By doing so they never were able to develop any timing or cohesion as a unit and it showed.
     
  11. Greg C.

    Greg C. Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    2,856
    Ratings:
    +0
    Agreed, Lare, although it is possible that Sherman did this simply because none of them were very good. Regardless, I do like the way that McCarthy has given Colledge and Spitz the upper hand in the battle for these guard positions. They are our starters until somebody beats them out. It sure helps to have a GM and a coach who are on the same page.
     
  12. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    i agree(i said it was ONE of his worst moves).

    A mediocre line that plays together consistently will do better than a weekly reshuffled line of more talented players.
     
  13. Buckeyepackfan

    Buckeyepackfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    804
    Ratings:
    +0
    Sherman did what he had to do with the players supplied to him by TT.
    TT determined that 2nd level free agents and rookies were good enough to replace to solid starters. That was just the beginning of the problems.

    How many times is this going to be discussed????

    Hopefully the injury bug does not hit The Packers like it did last year, if it does it could be another long year.
     
  14. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    Agreed Buckeye, He also stated that the "OG is not really important" right after he left Wahle walk. Some people just can't accept it and would rather blame it on Sherman. We had a pretty good O-Line until TT took over and then he failed to address it or have any plan on how to fix it.
     
  15. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    yep, TT came in and said "guards, i decree that your contracts are up."

    cuz, you know, TT has the power to make peoples contracts come to an end. wow, pyle.
     
  16. retiredgrampa

    retiredgrampa Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2005
    Messages:
    804
    Ratings:
    +0
    ...and how many times does it need to be repeated that TT had basically no cap room left to work with. Some say that if TT had been more imaginative he could have come up with the money to keep Wahle. Maybe, but then he would not have been in the great cap situation he was in this year. TT knew that this team was NOT one good guard away from a solid team. He knew the team would have to bite the bullet in order to come back strong. We ARE coming back strong and 2007 will be even better.
     
  17. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    no, TT should have sold his kidney to keep wahle.(sarcasm)
     
  18. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Oh so you are saying TT did not say that Trom?
     
  19. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Pyle, after trying to find a way TT could have fit Whale's contract under the cap, I have to conclude that TT simply couldn't keep Whale. It wasn't possible.
     
  20. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    pyle, check this out. It was my ATTEMPT at trying to be TT for a day, and in the end I concluded there was no way TT could have signed Whale because of the limited cap space he had to work with.

    If I want to keep Whale, I'm handicapped because of my salary cap this year. That means I have to low ball him presently, and give him an outrageous offer, one that will overpay him WHILE allowing me the ability to get out of it once the high payout starts, without any cap ramifications.

    Length of contract: 5 years

    1st year salary: I offer Whale a low salary, starting point is $500,000. I offer him a 1.5 milllion dollar signing bonus, which is spread out over 5 years, meaning I take a cap hit of $300,000 extra this year. Total value of the deal in year one is $800,000. Leaves me enough cash, about 2 million to sign any players along the way should we have injuries. If worse comes to worse, I ask Brett to convert a part of his base salary (about 2 million or so) into a roster bonus for this upcoming year, once activated will be spread over the remainder of the contract, making sure Brett gets his money, and I save an additional $500,000 or so on the cap. Total cap charge: $800,000.

    Year 2: (Carry over signing bonus charge = $300,000) Brett may not be here, so we will have about an extra 8 million or so to play with. Add that to the money that will be freed up from this year, and we have some serious cash to play with. 4 years left on the deal, I need to pay him a ton this year. Base salary will be 2 million dollars, a big jump. Roster bonus of of 10 million, which will be spread out amongst the cap for 4 years, costing me 2.5 million in subsequent years. Total cap charge for this year: 2 million base + $300,000 signing + 2.5 million signing bonus, which equates to 4.8 million dollars.

    So far the deal is worth: $500,000 base + 2 million base = 2.5 million base. Bonuses: 10 million + 1.5 million = 11.5 million bonus. Total value thus far: 11.5 + 2.5 = 14 million.

    Year 3: (Carry over charge = 2.8 million) Well I am under the impression Brett is gone, or in his final year. If this his is last year, I think I can ask Whale to defer his bonus payment until next year, which I think he will gladly do. If Brett is gone, I have even more money to spend. Starting base salary: $3 million. 3 years left on the deal, so I will add a moderate roster bonus, one I can manage. 3 million dollar roster bonus, spread out over 3 years. another 1 million cap charge for this year. 3 base + 2.8 in bonuses + 1 million in bonuses = 6.8 million cap charge for the year, so we are good to go, seeing as I expect the salary cap to be damn close to 100 million.

    Total value of the deal thus far: 14 million + 3 million base + 3 million roster bonus = 20 million.

    Year 4: (Carry over cap charge: 3.8 million) Well I think I can commit a little more to Whale this year, since I expect us to have over a 100 million dollar salary cap. Base sallary: 4 million. roster bonus of $400,000, divided over two years equals a charge of $200,000 this year. Cap charge this year: 3.8 million in bonuses + 4 million base + 200,000 bonus = 8 million cap charge.

    Total value of deal thus far: 20 million + 4 million base + $400,000 bonus = 24.4 million

    Year 5: (Carry over charge: $4 million) Final year of the deal, so I set the base salary at 4 million, Whale will be 33 at this point. I add a $100,000 roster bonus this year, so the cap is set at 8.1 million. I add a clause that I can buy out Whale, lets say for 3 million. If he refuses this clause, I argue that at any point I can refuse to pay him a roster bonus, and set him free. Thus he accepts my offer of a buyout clause, one which will be triggered if a payment of a roster bonus is NOT made, or at your discression. So in year 5, I can pay 3 million, and get out of the deal (or at any point).

    this buyout clause also allows me to protect myself if I need to cut Whale, incase of the new CBA.

    Total calue of contract: 24.4 million + 4.1 million = 28.5 million, with a buyout clause of 3 million, up it to 4/5 million if it becomes a sticking point.

    5 year deal worth 28.5 million dollars.
     
  21. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    no, AADP, he coulda sold his first born boy.
     
  22. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    It has been stated over and over again that TT COULD have resigned Wahle had he got creative. I remember reading an article mid-season last year that pointed out several ways in which TT could have re-signed him.


    I then combine that with the fact that TT had no plan on how to replace them. Do you honestly expect this line to be much better this year? Maybe you do and thats fine but I would disagree. Most likely we will be starting 1 or 2 rookies. Good Luck. Welcome to the NFL boys, we're not in the WAC anymore.


    I have full faith that in about 2-3 months I can come here and state "I told you so." Then it will be followed up by more excuses. I'm all about accountability, sorry if some people can't deal with it.


    Excuses, blaming other people, etc, are not acceptable. I deal with young men every day in practice that try that. Everytime a kid doesn't make a play he should have made I hear "I was being held" or "He was grabbing my facemask" and it makes me sick. When I lose a game I will be the first person to say "I screwed up." I could say "They were bigger than us" or "They illegally chop-blocked" or whatever, but I refuse to. It's all about the results and being accountable.

    TT was in charge of a team that went 4-12. Not acceptable. Tell me how great he is after he actually puts a winning product on the field. His JOB is to be creative and do what he has to do to give this team the best chance to be competitive. He FAILED when it came to Wahle. Favre is in the twilight of his career. If this teams wants to make a run starting 2 rookie guards is a bad start. Will they pan out in 2-3 years, perhaps, but by that time Brett will be gone.


    I ask for TT to build a competitive TEAM. I could care less about building a solid LB core if you are going to ignore the O-line. You build a team not a unit. You can't do it in one year. There comes a time when you have to resign some key guys by being creative. If not you will be chasing your tail. So in a few years if our O-Line gets to be a bright spot on our team are we going to fail to address the WR position or the RB's because those players have contracts expiring. It's a vicious circle.


    When people start holding TT responsible for his mistakes instead of kicking a dead dog, MS, repeatedly we will be on the track to rebuilding this franchise. Sadly its easier to just make excuses for someone. It's not my style, sorry.
     
  23. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Maybe he should have gotten creative and took his helmet off, or slipped his jersey off.
     
  24. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Pyle, the problem with resigning Whale to a contract is two-fold, IMO.

    1. Whale, entering the prime of his career, would want a huge signing bonus, which couldn't be done.

    2. Resigning Whale would have emant that ultimately, we wouldn't have as much money to sign players, which we would have needed because the players were dropping like flies. We would have been put in a situation like the Titans, where we can't sign any players or bring them up from the PS to replace our injured players.
     
  25. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0


    Or jabbed him quicker at the line and shot the gap to prevent him from being in the position to do that to begin with.
     

Share This Page