State of the Line Offensive Line Coach/Scheme/Players

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
I'd like to nominate you Jack as #1 Head-In-Sand fan.

Do you really want to double down on this silly post?
I was very pleased this morning to read in jsonline that the Packers now agree (finally) that Rodgers must be kept upright by bailing out an incompetent O-line. My sincerest thanks to all you Packer fans who have raised bigtime hell over the punishment our QB has taken and demanded that he be protected. YOU have saved the season! Because of YOU, the sportswriters finally joined the clamor. Because of YOU, Rodgers might well heal up and play lights out again. Should he be so bruised and battered he will not fully heal up; he's still better bruised and battered than most QBs and can get us to 12-4. You guys are the greatest!Thank YOU! Thank YOU! Thank YOU!
The Packers “now agree that Rodgers must be kept upright”? Sure, Thompson, McCarthy and their staffs don’t care anything about the health of their franchise QB. How ridiculous. And of course Thompson and McCarthy listen to the demands of fans and sportswriters. That must be why they caved on Favre’s return from his “retirement”, right? How silly. IMO “naïve” was understating it.

Barclay has done well for being thrown into the fray as a rookie but according to McGinn he was also responsible for 6 ½ pressures Sunday night. This poster is acting like the Packers have ignored an all-pro sitting on the bench. To have success in the playoffs the Packers OL is going to have to be able to pass block against the best Ds.
 
OP
OP
1

12theTruth

Guest
Do you really want to double down on this silly post? The Packers “now agree that Rodgers must be kept upright”? Sure, Thompson, McCarthy and their staffs don’t care anything about the health of their franchise QB. How ridiculous. And of course Thompson and McCarthy listen to the demands of fans and sportswriters. That must be why they caved on Favre’s return from his “retirement”, right? How silly. IMO “naïve” was understating it.

Barclay has done well for being thrown into the fray as a rookie but according to McGinn he was also responsible for 6 ½ pressures Sunday night. This poster is acting like the Packers have ignored an all-pro sitting on the bench. To have success in the playoffs the Packers OL is going to have to be able to pass block against the best Ds.

What compels you to engage in silly personal rebukes? Most posters can maintain a discussion without putdowns like calling folks words, "silly", "naive", "assigning stud/duds to posters and or their thoughts instead of the team/players/coaches. I haven't explored whether there is an ignore option on this forum but if there was you'd be one that is sure to warrant it.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
I haven't explored whether there is an ignore option on this forum but if there was you'd be one that is sure to warrant it.

When someone posts those working for the Packers and/or Packers fans don't care about the health of Rodgers, that's ridiculous IMO. And when he thanks the fans and sportswriters for making the Packers' staff care about Rodgers' health IMO that's embarrassingly silly (or "uniformed" or "stupid" if you prefer). As if McCarthy is unaware of the number of hits Rodgers takes or doesn't care if he remains "upright". That's absurd. And if there are any GMs and HCs in the league who have proven they're willing to buck public opinion to advance what they see as the best interests of their team, it's Thompson and McCarthy.

When you posted "under MM and Campen we have never really had a go to short yardage running attack to rely on" I posted Kuhn's 3rd and 4th and short conversion stats. When you criticized McCarthy's play calling but couldn't back it up with one example, I pointed that out. (BTW, the "Duds" reference was meant to be humorous as evidenced by the smilie and by AmishMafia finding it "funny".) So I ask you, what compels you to do that and then not respond when your error about short yardage success under McCarthy and Campen is pointed out?

In other threads when I posted as many as 9 questions for those like you who think firing Campen will cure all the problems on the OL, why didn't any of you even attempt to answer them?

At this point I really don't care if you respond or not so let me help you: Click on my user name, then click on "Ignore".
- - - - - -

BTW, could someone post an article which talks about Campen not being responsible for the OL play in 2010? I ask because I don’t remember reading or hearing that (not that anyone can read and hear everything). But IMO it's disingenuous for fans to criticize Campen for all the mistakes made by O linemen, but not give him credit for any of the good like developing players like Sitton. And for those who post that Barclay should be starting at LT next year, who do you suppose has been coaching him? Again I'm not a fan of Campen but he's been the OL coach since 2007 and he seems to be a "better" coach when he has better talent to work with. If the Clifton of the last 6 games of the 2010 season was starting at LT and a pre-injury Tauscher from the same season was starting at RT, Campen would look one hell-of-a-lot better. And a healthy Wells (I believe he's injured now) would be better than Saturday at OC. My main point regarding assistant coaches is it's very difficult for fans to know how responsible they are for the performance of their units. For example, how good would Kevin Greene look if Matthews were never a Packer? And it's not only talent but also the scheme being run that has an impact on the OL.
 

JBlood

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
3,159
Reaction score
467
The point is: The offensive line for the Packers has never been an overpowering unit in the last 7 years; and this year it ranks near the bottom of the league in both running and passing on Football Outsiders' site. The offense succeeds because of an incredible QB who is able to make plays with his feet, and with his arm. The TD Rogers scored Sunday night is a classic example; and his completion after scrambling to Cobb last week for an important 1st down was another. If we had a line the quality of NE's, or SF's, or the Giants' we'd be unstoppable. And Rogers WILL get injured if the line play continues at the same level it has for so many years. That's the point Grave is making, and I agree. You can blame all the talent, except for Sitton; or you can blame the coaching. It's probably both. But it's more logical to change the coaching before changing all the personnel, seems to me.
 

JBlood

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Messages
3,159
Reaction score
467
In other threads when I posted as many as 9 questions for those like you who think firing Campen will cure all the problems on the OL, why didn't any of you even attempt to answer them?
I did:


  1. ThxJackVainisi said:
    My "defense" of Campen is comprised of my contention that fans don't know enough to properly assign enough blame to him to intelligently advocate for his firing.

    The common denominator of the performance of the OL is not solely Campen; the common denominators are Thompson and talent acquisition and McCarthy and the offensive scheme and play-calling. And until this season, Philbin.In 2010 Kuhn converted 10 of 12 3rd–and-1 and 4th-and-1 attempts.

    That you don’t respond to any of the direct questions I asked is telling. I’ll try one more time:

    1. How responsible is Campen for installing the ZBS and relying on it completely initially and to a lesser extent now?
    2. Isn’t it reasonable to assume that Campen would have preferred the traditional blocking system he learned and used throughout his NFL career?
    3. How much influence does McCarthy and Clements (and formerly Philbin) have on blocking schemes and how Campen coaches the OL?
    4. How much input does Campen have on talent acquisition?
    5. What impact does the loss of Clifton have on the OL?
    6. What impact does the loss of Wells have on the OL?
    7. What impact does the loss of Philbin have on the offense in general and on the OL in particular?
    8. Who is responsible for the shuffling on the OL and with the decision to have Sherrod take snaps at OG in his first TC, for example?
    9. If Campen is incompetent as some of you contend, how did the Packers win a title with him as OL coach?

    I won’t be surprised if you don’t answer any of the questions since my point is you really can’t - no fan has enough information to. Either way, you can have the last word. I for one have spent too much time on this subject since it is a moot point: Campen isn’t going anywhere this season.
    JBlood, Nov 2, 2012 Edit Delete Report
    #55 Reply

  2. thnxjack: I value your opinions, here are a few of mine: 1) MM decided on using the ZBS, with Jagodzinski the man to teach it. Then Philbin, then Campen. Nobody had any expertise except Jago in the scheme. To my knowledge, the Packers still use the ZBS much of the time 2) Agreed, but when he accepted the job as offensive line coach I would imagine he agreed to teach the ZBS, and felt competent in doing so. Had he admitted he had no expertise in the ZBS teaching, why would he have been hired, unless the scheme was to be dropped? 3) I suspect Philbin had a lot to do with the scheme, but, again Campen was hired to teach the line techniques. It is generally assumed that Philbin took over the offensive line coaching after the debacle against the Lions in 2010. The line then went on to be dominant throughout the rest of the regular season and to the Championship. 4) No idea, but I would assume all position coaches put their own 2 cents worth of opinion on all players being discussed. Whether anyone pays attention to his opinion is the real question. If his bosses are not interested in his opinion regarding talent, why would they keep him around? 5) Clifton was dominant when young and healthy, and during the run to the Championship. We don't have a L tackle of that ability as of now. It should be noted that Larry Beightol had a dominant offensive line the entire 6 years he was the line coach under Ray Rhodes and Sherman. Either he was blessed with unusual talent, or his coaching was important. 6) Less than a tackle the quality of a young Clifton 7) I think Philbin was important. See #3 8) The shuffling of the line has been every spring that MM has been head coach. Nobody could decide whether Lang was a G or T; Sitton a G or T; Sherrod G or T; EDS G, T, or C; etc., etc., etc. I would think a dominant AND SUCCESSFUL offensive line coach would determine such things. At one point Lang was a tackle according to Campen, and a guard by McCarthy. Now he's a guard. Does that mean MM has no confidence in Campen's opinion? 9) The offensive line was up and down during 2010 until the (almost) devastating loss in Detroit. What followed was a complete turnaround by the O line that had much to do with getting into the playoffs, and then winning Championship #13. It is thought that Philbin was the director of the line during that run. If so, it explains the Championship while Campen was the offensive line coach of record.

    This is all my opinion only, and I have no unusual insight to the inner workings of the Packers. But I can see that the line play is substandard, and it will result in the injury of the MVP if something is not done.
    Someone has to turn things around, as occurred in 2010. It should be Campen, but someone has to do it.​
    "He was a poet, a vagrant, a philosopher, a lady’s man and a drunk. He was also one of the greatest Green Bay Packers who ever lived." D. Gullickson, Vagabond Halfback

 

Members online

Latest posts

Top