Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Who do you got at RG next year?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 18, 19, 20 ... 29, 30, 31  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Packerraymond


Moderator
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 19215
Location: Oconomowoc, WI
PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He was far better than a tackling dummy that's just stupid talk. His first start was against Fletcher Cox, even Lang would've given up hurries. He was an average guard in pass pro and far below average in run blocking. Barclay is flipped. I'd rather have the guy who protects Rodgers better.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NormSizedMidget


Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 17805
PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CentralFC wrote:
NormSizedMidget wrote:
F seemed excessive. He should use his brain and realize he shouldn't have been at guard.

It wasn't just that grade. He goes out of his way to be negative and a grouch IMO.

He's just a old curmudgeon. It's sad with all the resources he still has access to be can't be more balanced.


Eh I disagree. He tends to produce a lot of click-bait, but his analysis of Spriggs' wasn't too far out of left field given our investment in the kid. He was just out of his element. Plus, he's paid to be critical, and his eyes have seen 20x the players/things I have, so I give him the benefit of the doubt in most instances.

It's really his weekly/Saturday hit pieces that frustrate me, nothing about his season-in-review or personnel analysis bugs me. Spriggs' F wasn't a reflection of Spriggs as a player going forward. He was just exceptionally lousy in his limited action last year. Cox was a great learning experience. The reader should inject some of his/her own context (i.e., Spriggs is a tackle prospect, needs a year to develop his upper body and anchor, was playing an All-Pro, etc.).


There was other laughable ones though. Wasn't Guion a D-

There was other issues I had. I'm not going to look it up again but it was looked at with a negative eye to me. He's definitely seen a lot of football. I just think he's writing these days with an obvious slant to sell print. He has his own cult of other angry grouches haha
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
CentralFC


Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 11625
PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NormSizedMidget wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
NormSizedMidget wrote:
F seemed excessive. He should use his brain and realize he shouldn't have been at guard.

It wasn't just that grade. He goes out of his way to be negative and a grouch IMO.

He's just a old curmudgeon. It's sad with all the resources he still has access to be can't be more balanced.


Eh I disagree. He tends to produce a lot of click-bait, but his analysis of Spriggs' wasn't too far out of left field given our investment in the kid. He was just out of his element. Plus, he's paid to be critical, and his eyes have seen 20x the players/things I have, so I give him the benefit of the doubt in most instances.

It's really his weekly/Saturday hit pieces that frustrate me, nothing about his season-in-review or personnel analysis bugs me. Spriggs' F wasn't a reflection of Spriggs as a player going forward. He was just exceptionally lousy in his limited action last year. Cox was a great learning experience. The reader should inject some of his/her own context (i.e., Spriggs is a tackle prospect, needs a year to develop his upper body and anchor, was playing an All-Pro, etc.).


There was other laughable ones though. Wasn't Guion a D-

There was other issues I had. I'm not going to look it up again but it was looked at with a negative eye to me. He's definitely seen a lot of football. I just think he's writing these days with an obvious slant to sell print. He has his own cult of other angry grouches haha


Does grading Spriggs at an F and Guion at a D- (as opposed to a D+ and C-) really sell a more noticeable amount of copies/gain more clicks?

Yeah he's generally a grouch, though. I agree.
_________________
packerjmf wrote:
GWH87 wrote:
Somebody take the off season shovel out of Ted's hands & bury him in his own hole.

How can he dig a hole if he's too busy sitting on his hands?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fattlipp


Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Posts: 1186
PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What if Cam Robinson were to somehow fall to 29?
Could he play Guard?

Or would you draft him and stick him at RT and move Bulaga inside and keep Spriggs as a super back-up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jaegybomb


Joined: 29 Apr 2016
Posts: 215
PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the other 2 would probably be more able to move inside. All Robinson really has going for him is the ideal frame to grow into an LT.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 14705
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fattlipp wrote:
What if Cam Robinson were to somehow fall to 29?
Could he play Guard?

Or would you draft him and stick him at RT and move Bulaga inside and keep Spriggs as a super back-up.


I don't think they want to move Bulaga or Spriggs inside and it appears Ted and/or Mike don't put a lot of value in the guard position so I suspect they'll go in a different direction at 29 and pick up an IOL in a later round.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vegas492


Joined: 30 Oct 2012
Posts: 1464
Location: Pewaukee, Wisconsin
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fattlipp wrote:
What if Cam Robinson were to somehow fall to 29?
Could he play Guard?

Or would you draft him and stick him at RT and move Bulaga inside and keep Spriggs as a super back-up.

I've watched zero film on Robinson. But, Kirwan on Sirius XM seems to think that he would be a dominating guard. And an underwhelming tackle.
_________________
From my perspective, and I don't know if Brett would say this [publicly] -- I know he's shared with me -- we would not be nearly as appreciative of everything that the Packers are had we not seen it from the other side," ---Ryan Longwell 2016
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blankman0021


Joined: 02 May 2007
Posts: 2733
Location: MKE
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pugger wrote:
fattlipp wrote:
What if Cam Robinson were to somehow fall to 29?
Could he play Guard?

Or would you draft him and stick him at RT and move Bulaga inside and keep Spriggs as a super back-up.


I don't think they want to move Bulaga or Spriggs inside and it appears Ted and/or Mike don't put a lot of value in the guard position so I suspect they'll go in a different direction at 29 and pick up an IOL in a later round.


Look for Asiata in R3. Some rumors are out there via supposed talks to Packers lower-level scouts about interest, and the round matches the players value.
_________________
The Doctor wrote:
ALLONS-Y, ALONSO!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
{Family Ghost}


Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 2859
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't see us taking an offensive lineman in the first few rounds .. we probably have enough talent on hand already, and we spent multiple picks last year to acquire Spriggs and Murphy. I think our starting guard will come from that group of Barclay, Murphy, and Patrick. It was confirmed the other day by one of the beat reporters that Murphy is a full time guard now, and in competition for that RG job. We will probably take a T/G prospect in round four or five.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blankman0021


Joined: 02 May 2007
Posts: 2733
Location: MKE
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vegas492 wrote:
fattlipp wrote:
What if Cam Robinson were to somehow fall to 29?
Could he play Guard?

Or would you draft him and stick him at RT and move Bulaga inside and keep Spriggs as a super back-up.

I've watched zero film on Robinson. But, Kirwan on Sirius XM seems to think that he would be a dominating guard. And an underwhelming tackle.


If you take Robinson at 29 you're hoping he's a 10+ year starter for you. While I think he could be that player, I just think you're going to get more impact out of a R1 CB, EDGE, or O. skill position.
_________________
The Doctor wrote:
ALLONS-Y, ALONSO!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cadmus


Joined: 22 Apr 2013
Posts: 2323
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

blankman0021 wrote:
Pugger wrote:
fattlipp wrote:
What if Cam Robinson were to somehow fall to 29?
Could he play Guard?

Or would you draft him and stick him at RT and move Bulaga inside and keep Spriggs as a super back-up.


I don't think they want to move Bulaga or Spriggs inside and it appears Ted and/or Mike don't put a lot of value in the guard position so I suspect they'll go in a different direction at 29 and pick up an IOL in a later round.


Look for Asiata in R3. Some rumors are out there via supposed talks to Packers lower-level scouts about interest, and the round matches the players value.


No earlier than #93.

Wouldn't shock me to see Asiata slip into the 4th Round.

He will turn 25 before the end of his rookie year and NFLDS apparently forgets to take the age of each prospect into account when they rank.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CentralFC


Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 11625
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cadmus wrote:
blankman0021 wrote:
Pugger wrote:
fattlipp wrote:
What if Cam Robinson were to somehow fall to 29?
Could he play Guard?

Or would you draft him and stick him at RT and move Bulaga inside and keep Spriggs as a super back-up.


I don't think they want to move Bulaga or Spriggs inside and it appears Ted and/or Mike don't put a lot of value in the guard position so I suspect they'll go in a different direction at 29 and pick up an IOL in a later round.


Look for Asiata in R3. Some rumors are out there via supposed talks to Packers lower-level scouts about interest, and the round matches the players value.


No earlier than #93.

Wouldn't shock me to see Asiata slip into the 4th Round.

He will turn 25 before the end of his rookie year and NFLDS apparently forgets to take the age of each prospect into account when they rank.


yeesh.

I still can't fathom how Cleveland thought Brandon Weeden was a redeemable first round selection. Blows my mind.
_________________
packerjmf wrote:
GWH87 wrote:
Somebody take the off season shovel out of Ted's hands & bury him in his own hole.

How can he dig a hole if he's too busy sitting on his hands?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Packerraymond


Moderator
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 19215
Location: Oconomowoc, WI
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm hoping the year Lane Taylor had opens up our agility cutoffs on guard prospects. I mean it really isnt all that important for guards and it cuts off guys like Isidora and Dorian Johnson that I think could plug and play. I mean it definitely is a cutoff that's worked, but if you don't care about guard enough to pay them anyway, might as well just find some serviceable guys.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cadmus


Joined: 22 Apr 2013
Posts: 2323
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Packerraymond wrote:
I'm hoping the year Lane Taylor had opens up our agility cutoffs on guard prospects. I mean it really isnt all that important for guards and it cuts off guys like Isidora and Dorian Johnson that I think could plug and play. I mean it definitely is a cutoff that's worked, but if you don't care about guard enough to pay them anyway, might as well just find some serviceable guys.


I don't think they want 2 Lane Taylor types on that OL.

Now, (total hypothetical) if Lane Taylor had that year and then departed in FA last month (I realize he's under contract) and we had re-signed Lang then maybe they would be more open to a less athletic guard.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CentralFC


Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 11625
PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Packerraymond wrote:
I'm hoping the year Lane Taylor had opens up our agility cutoffs on guard prospects. I mean it really isnt all that important for guards and it cuts off guys like Isidora and Dorian Johnson that I think could plug and play. I mean it definitely is a cutoff that's worked, but if you don't care about guard enough to pay them anyway, might as well just find some serviceable guys.


Those numbers have to reflect the value we place on pass pro, right?
_________________
packerjmf wrote:
GWH87 wrote:
Somebody take the off season shovel out of Ted's hands & bury him in his own hole.

How can he dig a hole if he's too busy sitting on his hands?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 18, 19, 20 ... 29, 30, 31  Next
Page 19 of 31

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group