Barbre looked bad last night and the Seattle game I thought. It didn't look like he handled the bigger DTs very well at all. Even against the backups for Jacksonville he stuggled from what I saw. I'm sure he'll get better though.

No tapes LSU. I noticed him a couple times last year when I saw BC play on tv. Now that Jeff Jagodzinski is the HC over there, he'll most certainly use a very similar scheme to what we use (WCO with zone blocking). From what I've read, Cherilus is supposed to be one of the best Boston College Oline prospects ever....that's saying a lot considering some of the Olinemen that have come from there. I think it would be a pretty smooth transition for Cherilus.

quote:

Originally posted by LSU4GB:
Agred with all here pretty much.

GB was solid running vs a decent SEA defense.

GB was putrid running vs an exceptional JAX defense.



The reality is almost certainly in the middle. If they can be near adequate early then I don't doubt they'll improve as the season progresses - getting Morency back won't hurt either.


That aside IMO the true needs next year will be offensive skill players.

Signing an LJ Smith would help.

Smith is hurt again. I don't know what the rest of the TE field looks like but even a mid tier guy would be a plus.

I think the safest prediction on the run game is it'll be a rather unexciting RBBC approach that may not be the strength of the offense but won't be completely inept either. Who really knows.

I'm still interested to see if TT tries any late preseason trades for guys like Rayner, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Grave Digger:
I agree Colledge looks like their LT prospect of the future, but I'm not nuts about that. I'm not saying he couldn't be our LT of the future because I have no evidence to say one way or the other, I just like next year's crop of LTs. Colledge has looked good at guard IMO, and Barbre has been consistantly getting blown up so far. Barbre could get better, but right now I wouldn't move Colledge. I think I said it once before that Boston College LT Gosder Cherilus looks to be a very good fit for us IMO.

As for safety, I like Bigby and I like Rouse. Between those 2 and Collins I think our safety position will be fine for several years. I don't see any of them ever emerging as a Leroy Butler type, but I don't think it will be a weakness anymore.

I agree about LT. I like Colledge but I'd rather he stayed at guard and they picked up a definitive LT in the draft. Barbre will take some work, can't all be studs right away. Hell, Coston has been a work in progress for 3 years.

I'm not sold on Rouse yet. He had all day to get that hit in last night. Not saying he won't/can't be good, I personally, haven't heard much about the guy this TC.

quote:

Originally posted by LSU4GB:
Agred with all here pretty much.

GB was solid running vs a decent SEA defense.

GB was putrid running vs an exceptional JAX defense.

The reality is almost certainly in the middle. If they can be near adequate early then I don't doubt they'll improve as the season progresses - getting Morency back won't hurt either.

I don't know why, but so often teams with supposedly good running games look like crap in the preseason. You draft a guy like Sean Alexander or Larry Johnson in FFL then check a preseason box score and you see they had 5 attempts for 10 yards. Then the regular season starts and they blow up for 150 yards and 2 TD's.

Willis McGahee had a sweet 6 rush for 3 yards performance last week. That was including a SEVEN yard run. I wonder how many Ravens fans are jumping off a bridge? I drafted Travis Henry and he put up 25 yards on 10 carries last week, including a 10 yard run. 15 yards on his other 9 carries. I guess I should cut him. Willie Parker had 4 rushes for 4 yards. Glad I didn't pick him. Ladell Betts had 12 yards on 6 carries. Rudi Johnson had 15 yards on 6 carries. Terrible. Caddy Williams managed -1 yard on 3 carries. BUST. Ahman had 19 yards on 6 carries. Edge had 11 on 5 carries. Brian Westbrook had 16 yards on 6 carries. Marshawn Lynch had 16 yards on 5 carries. Thank God Buffalo took him off the board.

That's just a single week of preseason. I'm reasonably sure that every one of these guys are much better than their stats last week.

I'll be worried about the running game if Morency returns and they can't run on the Eagles. They were 25th in the NFL giving up 4.5 YPC last year. Now I realize there is at least one person on X4 that isn't impressed by 4.5 YPC by a RB but that's not a very good average for a defense to allow for a season.

One factor is that they haven't opened up the entire playbook (including in the running game). It's only a handful of vanilla plays.

You still hate to see the lack of production, but that was a very good defense we were playing last night.

Barry Sanders was held to negative yardage in a game at Lambeau because there was simply no place to run, not because he wasn't a great back.

Jackson is obviously not Barry Sanders, but he needs some kind of blocking up front to be productive.

Flat out, it wasn't there last night.

Our success (or lack thereof) running the football is going to be heavily determined by how good/poor the blocking is.

It was my impression LJ Smith was being held out 'til the season...not that he was re-injured.
It's neither here nor there, though, since I suspect he'll be healthy by next UFA period...and in all likelihood they'll re-sign him anyway.
They know it's not easy to find good receiving TE's.



We've been through the Colledge debate before - many had him as a LT prospect. It's completely plausible GB believes he's their LT after Clifton's contract expires in '09.

They'll keep throwing him out there in practice when they rest Clifton and hopefully we won't have to see how he's progressed in games.

Both Colledge and Barbre have the skill set to excel at LT IMO...so we'll see if either make it out there. Crazy thing is for a coverted DL that Thompson kid flashes...
They're flush on the OL IMO...their backups should improve.



If LT becomes a "need" for GB then I'll feel pretty good about their chances...

I agree that the coaching has probably been better (certainly better than it was under Slowit). But what I'm arguing is that as atrociously as the defense played in '04, the cupboard was nowhere near as bare as many claimed. Hawk and Woodson were big additions--especially Woodson, given just how important corners are and just how bad Woodson's predecessors were. The rest of the improvement is almost entirely from player development. I don't think the defense would be much worse off without Poppinga, Jolley, or even Pickett. If your GM has any eye for talent at all, players of that caliber aren't hard to replace.

quote:

Originally posted by lukey:
I agree that the coaching has probably been better (certainly better than it was under Slowit). But what I'm arguing is that as atrociously as the defense played in '04, the cupboard was nowhere near as bare as many claimed. Hawk and Woodson were big additions--especially Woodson, given just how important corners are and just how bad Woodson's predecessors were. The rest of the improvement is almost entirely from player development. I don't think the defense would be much worse off without Poppinga, Jolley, or even Pickett. If your GM has any eye for talent at all, players of that caliber aren't hard to replace.

So we should have kept Donnell Washington, Joey Thomas, Mark Roman, etc. because they just needed some coaching? Sounds reasonable.

Anybody know why we gave Pickett a contract or drafted Jolly? Hell, we could've got them off the scrap heap. As I recall, the run defense up the middle under Sherman's tenure was spectacular. Barnett didn't get pushed around behind the line at all when trying to blitz.

Unreal. Newsflash, Sherman is gone and the Packers have a real defense because of it.

quote:

Originally posted by LSU4GB:
It was my impression LJ Smith was being held out 'til the season...not that he was re-injured.
It's neither here nor there, though, since I suspect he'll be healthy by next UFA period...and in all likelihood they'll re-sign him anyway.
They know it's not easy to find good receiving TE's.

Yeah, that's what I thought also. He had his Hernia surgery and was out for a while. I thought I remember hearing that he came back and tried to do some work in training camp but it was too much so he sat out longer. I think he'll be fine come time for free agency.

quote:

We've been through the Colledge debate before - many had him as a LT prospect. It's completely plausible GB believes he's their LT after Clifton's contract expires in '09.

They'll keep throwing him out there in practice when they rest Clifton and hopefully we won't have to see how he's progressed in games.

Both Colledge and Barbre have the skill set to excel at LT IMO...so we'll see if either make it out there. Crazy thing is for a coverted DL that Thompson kid flashes...
They're flush on the OL IMO...their backups should improve.

Yeah, I agree it's definitely plausible that MM and TT believe Colledge take Clifton's place. I personally wouldn't do it, but that's just my opinion. This is Colledge's 2nd year at LG...he's developing at that position. And while he's been getting reps at LT, his priority is LG. If he's doing well at LG, I don't see a need to change him over and have him go through the struggles of developing full time at LT.

If we can get a full time LT, that can develop on at that position behind Clifton, then I think we'd be fools not to jump on that (unless there is an elite RB or TE available to us).

I'm not as high on Barbre as you are I guess. He looked very raw to me. Same for Orrin Thompson. Very raw.

quote:

Hell, we could've got them off the scrap heap.

Pickett was picked off the scrap heap. Jolley was a late-round pick, and is nothing special. Like I said, any GM with an eye for talent could find similar players without expending much in terms of money or picks--they're not special talents (especially Jolley, who probably isn't even as good as Colin Cole).

Sherman was a pretty crappy GM. I called for his head early on. But the fact remains that most of the solid players on this defense were drafted, signed, or traded for by Wolf or Sherman. (In retrospect, though, maybe Sherman the coach made Sherman the GM look even worse than he actually was.)

quote:

Originally posted by lukey:

quote:

Hell, we could've got them off the scrap heap.

Pickett was picked off the scrap heap.

BS.

quote:

Originally posted by Coach:

quote:

Originally posted by lukey:

quote:

Hell, we could've got them off the scrap heap.

Pickett was picked off the scrap heap.

BS.

Yeah, as I recall, Pickett talked to other teams. He wasn't a "high profile" FA like Adalius Thomas but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have been an FA very long if the Packers hadn't signed him. He wasn't off the scrap heap.

Jolly was a pretty good DT in college also. He wasn't great, but I thought it was surprising he lasted as long as he did.

I'm not going to bother arguing the definition of "scrap heap." Pickett was lightly regarded, lightly pursued by other teams, and didn't get all that much cash from the Packers. He's exceeded expectations and proven to be a good pickup. Is he all that integral to the Packers current success? I don't think so. Would it be all that difficult to find someone else to fill his role? Probably not--again, if your GM is any good, he can find guys like Pickett when necessary without splurging.

quote:

Originally posted by lukey:
But the fact remains that most of the solid players on this defense were drafted, signed, or traded for by Wolf or Sherman. (In retrospect, though, maybe Sherman the coach made Sherman the GM look even worse than he actually was.)

I'm working through this as I put it together, so no preconceived notions here, but this is how the starting D stacks up:

Jenkins - IIRC, he's been around for both regimes;
Pickett - TT, and in no way is he "lightly regarded," nor was he when he signed.
Williams - Sherman
Kampman - Sherman
Hawk - TT
Barnett - TT
Pop - TT
Harris - Sherman, and probably his best trade.
Woodson - TT
Collins - TT
Bigby/Whoever - TT

That's 3 or 3.5 Sugar Bear guys out of 11, depending on how you classify Jenkins. 3.5 of 11 isn't "most," and I think it'd be hard to argue that the LB's and DL have gotten better with superior coaching to the previous regime. The same stool is coaching the DB's, so that's a wash, but there is better talent there.

Barnett was a Sherman I think. 2004 I think is when he was picked. Still your point still stands JJSD.

My bad - that's correct. Barnett was a Sherman guy, and a good 1st round pick.

quote:

Originally posted by lukey:
I'm not going to bother arguing the definition of "scrap heap." Pickett was lightly regarded, lightly pursued by other teams, and didn't get all that much cash from the Packers. He's exceeded expectations and proven to be a good pickup. Is he all that integral to the Packers current success? I don't think so. Would it be all that difficult to find someone else to fill his role? Probably not--again, if your GM is any good, he can find guys like Pickett when necessary without splurging.

You're not going to argue "scrap heap" because it doesn't support your argument and because you're dead wrong. It also seems you have a bit of selective memory since I recall that Pickett was regarded as one of the top available interior lineman that year.

Pickett also has the 12th highest salary (now that Ferguson's gone) on the team (more than Bubba and Wells), and a cap figure this year of 2.5 million.

"Scrap heap" my fanny.

quote:

Originally posted by JJSD:

quote:

Originally posted by lukey:
But the fact remains that most of the solid players on this defense were drafted, signed, or traded for by Wolf or Sherman. (In retrospect, though, maybe Sherman the coach made Sherman the GM look even worse than he actually was.)

I'm working through this as I put it together, so no preconceived notions here, but this is how the starting D stacks up:

Jenkins - IIRC, he's been around for both regimes;
Pickett - TT, and in no way is he "lightly regarded," nor was he when he signed.
Williams - Sherman
Kampman - Sherman
Hawk - TT
Barnett - TT
Pop - TT
Harris - Sherman, and probably his best trade.
Woodson - TT
Collins - TT
Bigby/Whoever - TT

That's 3 or 3.5 Sugar Bear guys out of 11, depending on how you classify Jenkins. 3.5 of 11 isn't "most," and I think it'd be hard to argue that the LB's and DL have gotten better with superior coaching to the previous regime. The same stool is coaching the DB's, so that's a wash, but there is better talent there.

I'm starting to feel bad.....thought I said much of the same on page one.



Overall talent has changed for the better, depth has changed for the better, coaching has changed for the better, players are being properly used, scheme is better, etcccc ....(repeat)

Packdog -

While your post is similar, that was a whole page ago - I'm way too lazy to look that up.

quote:

Originally posted by JJSD:

quote:

Originally posted by lukey:
But the fact remains that most of the solid players on this defense were drafted, signed, or traded for by Wolf or Sherman. (In retrospect, though, maybe Sherman the coach made Sherman the GM look even worse than he actually was.)

I'm working through this as I put it together, so no preconceived notions here, but this is how the starting D stacks up:

Jenkins - IIRC, he's been around for both regimes;
Pickett - TT, and in no way is he "lightly regarded," nor was he when he signed.
Williams - Sherman
Kampman - Sherman
Hawk - TT
Barnett - TT
Pop - TT
Harris - Sherman, and probably his best trade.
Woodson - TT
Collins - TT
Bigby/Whoever - TT

That's 3 or 3.5 Sugar Bear guys out of 11, depending on how you classify Jenkins. 3.5 of 11 isn't "most," and I think it'd be hard to argue that the LB's and DL have gotten better with superior coaching to the previous regime. The same stool is coaching the DB's, so that's a wash, but there is better talent there.

I don't know where people get the impression that I'm a big fan of Sherman. My contention is just this: in terms of personnel, TT hasn't added a whole lot beyond Hawk and Woodson, and given what we gave up to get them, they should be good. Like MichiganPacker said, though, it's a nice thing those moves worked out, and if most of Thompson's picks in the top half of the draft and big-money signings perform that well, the Packers will be in good shape for years to come.

Let's break it down by position.

Basically, Wolf and Sherman are responsible for the defensive line. Grady Jackson broke down, and TT replaced him with Pickett. Again, good move, but I don't think Pickett's an exceptional player, and I wouldn't be surprised if the defensive line got by just fine if Pickett blew out his knee and missed the season. Cole's a pretty good run stuffer.


LBs: as the defensive line gets better, so does Barnett. Typical pattern for speedy, undersized LBs. Hawk was a big addition. Pop's just a guy. Even at the end of his rope, I don't know that the Packers were much worse off with Diggs.

Secondary: We all know how good Woodson is, and how bad Carrol was. As good as the rest of the defense appears to be now, they'd probably still be in trouble with a terrible LCB. Harris was a Sherman guy. Collins is no better than Sharper--just cheaper and younger, and thus far, less of a playmaker. Mark Roman was awful. TT still hasn't found someone better.

Pickett vs. Gravy and Pop vs. Diggs = HUGE upgrade in speed and durability since Pop got back from his knee. That's the first thing I noticed this PS with the first defense - they're as fast as I've seen them in a long time.

quote:

Originally posted by JJSD:
Pickett vs. Gravy and Pop vs. Diggs = HUGE upgrade in speed and durability since Pop got back from his knee. That's the first thing I noticed this PS with the first defense - they're as fast as I've seen them in a long time.

What stands out to me is the fire and intensity. The defense is fast and is swarming around the football. During the Jags game, I noticed Hawk in the pile punching the RB trying get the ball loose. The boys are aggressive.

quote:

Originally posted by lukey:
Mark Roman was awful. TT still hasn't found someone better.

I completely agree Roman was awful, but I would not be so sure of your second sentence.

Bigby may very well be in the process of making a name for himself.

quote:

Originally posted by Coach:

quote:

Originally posted by lukey:
Mark Roman was awful. TT still hasn't found someone better.

I completely agree Roman was awful, but I would not be so sure of your second sentence.

Bigby may very well be in the process of making a name for himself.

Who was that mope of a CB Sherman had starting that one year... Hawthorne? Good God have we come a long ways!

Well, I hope so. God knows Marquand Manuel will never be making a name for himself. Even if the safeties remain mediocre or worse, hopefully it'll be less noticeable this year. A good push up front can cover up lots of blown assignments.