Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
What Do The Packers Need Most In 2013
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TJV" data-source="post: 490016" data-attributes="member: 4300"><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial'">I don't recall too many times the OL had "great trouble" blocking 3 rushers, particularly when they kept an extra blocker in, so I'd have to see some evidence to back up your belief. That's not to say there weren't problems in pass protection - that was obvious to everyone. As for evidence, in one of his post season columns, McGinn wrote that opponents blitzed on about 20% of pass plays, which was down from 23.7% the previous year - but that's only about a 4% difference from 2011. He also wrote that the average release time of Rodgers' 9 INTs was 3.11 seconds. (Remember the 2.5 second "clock" McCarthy installed in TC?) I haven't seen the average time per sack but I'll bet it's longer. That of course points to Rodgers and/or the receivers being somewhat culpable as well. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial'">The OL was charged with 35 of the 55 sacks surrendered and Rodgers was responsible for 14. Some here don't like to read it but the biggest problem on the OL was Marshall Newhouse. He surrendered nearly twice as many pressures (42.5) as any other OL. That's the most recorded by jsonline since they began keeping track of 'em in 1999. Some here want to blame Campen for that but how many OL coaches can make an NFL-quality starting LT on a passing team out of a player picked as a compensation pick after the 5th round of the draft? IMO if that guy becomes an adequate backup NFL OT, that's a feather in the coaching staff's caps. Newhouse shouldn't <em>have</em> to be the one starting. Thompson provided Sherrod as an alternative and due to the fault of no one, he got hurt. I hope we see an open competition at LT when TC begins. If Sherrod can't do it, I would like to see Bulaga and one of the youngsters like Datko given a shot. Of course I'd love it, but I don't think the Packers need a <em>dominant</em> OL. Fix the problem at LT and I think they'd be plenty good enough. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial'">There is hope for the OL. If you haven't already, I suggest finding the McGinn review of the OL in the playoff game at San Fran as it's very instructive. The OL received a grade of 4.5 out of 5 - they showed up against a very good front 7. They didn't give up a "bad" run. EDS had a very strong game, delivering a "heavy punch" and "</span><span style="font-family: 'Arial'">hits hard, works extremely hard and goes after people. He also was the only lineman who didn't yield a pressure." He played much better than Saturday last season IMO. Sitton gave up 0.5 pressures. Lang matched up against Justin Smith and "held up just fine". Barclay gave up two pressures and Newhouse's "maddening inconsistencies were evident…" </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Arial'">Having said all that if they have a LT prospect rated higher than a player on defense I'm all in favor of them drafting the LT. But because there are at least three players on the roster who can upgrade the LT spot (including Newhouse himself - if he was just determined to finish plays he'd be significantly better); because those who argue the D was much more responsible for the debacle in San Fran than the O have a point and stats to back them up; and because IMO there is a huge need for another playmaker on defense, I'm hoping a defender is the obvious pick at #26. </span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TJV, post: 490016, member: 4300"] [FONT=Georgia] [/FONT][FONT=Arial]I don't recall too many times the OL had "great trouble" blocking 3 rushers, particularly when they kept an extra blocker in, so I'd have to see some evidence to back up your belief. That's not to say there weren't problems in pass protection - that was obvious to everyone. As for evidence, in one of his post season columns, McGinn wrote that opponents blitzed on about 20% of pass plays, which was down from 23.7% the previous year - but that's only about a 4% difference from 2011. He also wrote that the average release time of Rodgers' 9 INTs was 3.11 seconds. (Remember the 2.5 second "clock" McCarthy installed in TC?) I haven't seen the average time per sack but I'll bet it's longer. That of course points to Rodgers and/or the receivers being somewhat culpable as well. [/FONT] [FONT=Arial]The OL was charged with 35 of the 55 sacks surrendered and Rodgers was responsible for 14. Some here don't like to read it but the biggest problem on the OL was Marshall Newhouse. He surrendered nearly twice as many pressures (42.5) as any other OL. That's the most recorded by jsonline since they began keeping track of 'em in 1999. Some here want to blame Campen for that but how many OL coaches can make an NFL-quality starting LT on a passing team out of a player picked as a compensation pick after the 5th round of the draft? IMO if that guy becomes an adequate backup NFL OT, that's a feather in the coaching staff's caps. Newhouse shouldn't [I]have[/I] to be the one starting. Thompson provided Sherrod as an alternative and due to the fault of no one, he got hurt. I hope we see an open competition at LT when TC begins. If Sherrod can't do it, I would like to see Bulaga and one of the youngsters like Datko given a shot. Of course I'd love it, but I don't think the Packers need a [I]dominant[/I] OL. Fix the problem at LT and I think they'd be plenty good enough. [/FONT] [FONT=Arial]There is hope for the OL. If you haven't already, I suggest finding the McGinn review of the OL in the playoff game at San Fran as it's very instructive. The OL received a grade of 4.5 out of 5 - they showed up against a very good front 7. They didn't give up a "bad" run. EDS had a very strong game, delivering a "heavy punch" and "[/FONT][FONT=Arial][COLOR=windowtext]hits hard, works extremely hard and goes after people. He also was the only lineman who didn't yield a pressure." He played much better than Saturday last season IMO. Sitton gave up 0.5 pressures. Lang matched up against Justin Smith and "held up just fine". Barclay gave up two pressures and Newhouse's "maddening inconsistencies were evident…" [/COLOR][/FONT] [FONT=Arial][COLOR=windowtext]Having said all that if they have a LT prospect rated higher than a player on defense I'm all in favor of them drafting the LT. But because there are at least three players on the roster who can upgrade the LT spot (including Newhouse himself - if he was just determined to finish plays he'd be significantly better); because those who argue the D was much more responsible for the debacle in San Fran than the O have a point and stats to back them up; and because IMO there is a huge need for another playmaker on defense, I'm hoping a defender is the obvious pick at #26. [/COLOR][/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
PackerDNA
Latest posts
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: Thirteen Below
Today at 12:58 AM
Draft Talk
2024 Packer UDFA Tracker....
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Yesterday at 10:55 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 3rd round #88 MarShawn Lloyd RB
Latest: Poppa San
Yesterday at 10:38 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
R
2024 2nd Rd pick #58 Javon Bullard S
Latest: RicFlairoftheNFL
Yesterday at 10:05 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Round 7, pick 245: Michael Pratt, QB
Latest: Thirteen Below
Yesterday at 10:04 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
What Do The Packers Need Most In 2013
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top