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

Which center is probably better for Pittsburgh?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by cheesehurdler, Feb 5, 2011.

?

Which center would've been better for Pittsburgh?

  1. Pouncey at between 60% and 80%

    3 vote(s)
    30.0%
  2. Legursky at 100%

    7 vote(s)
    70.0%
  3. Neither

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. cheesehurdler

    cheesehurdler Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2011
    Messages:
    495
    Ratings:
    +194
    Which center would've been better for Pittsburgh, Pouncey at between 60% to 80%, or Doug Legursky at 100%?

    I think Legursky, because he has managed to do well in a high-pressure game, despite a couple fumbled snaps. Mendenhall managed to get 121 yards with Legursky under center. I think, with Pouncey playing in the game and not his best, he would've made his injury worse.

    What do you think?
     
  2. Rodgers in the House

    Rodgers in the House Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    367
    Ratings:
    +109
    He would have made his injury worse, but Pouncey is a beast. Just being there as a body makes the run game better. Raji is going to be too pumped for Legursky to handle. I can see Ben fumbling that ball twice because of this.
     
  3. Murgen

    Murgen MechaPackzilla

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    3,288
    Ratings:
    +585
    I say Legursky. He had 2 weeks to get ready. Legursky-Raji is a key matchup.
     
  4. VersusTheMoose

    VersusTheMoose Greatest of All-Time

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    1,340
    Ratings:
    +161
    Legursky, hard to argue otherwise.
     

Share This Page