Game 10: Pack at Kitties - Noon

[xTitan]

Kareem McKenzie still hasn't played a down for an NFL team this year. Hmmmm.....I may go ahead and side with the 32 NFL GM's opinions on this one. I wouldn't mind bringing him in tomorrow, but that kinda says something.

Jake Scott just got grabbed in desperation by Philly.

But hey, the grass is always greener...

ahhh it took me 2 minutes to come up with 2 guys, you wanted me to do that so you could basically rip on them, brilliant on your part....you forgot to mention how good McKenzie was last year for the Giants through the playoffs and Superbowl. You can rip on those two guys all you want but the Packers still have 1 crappy journeyman who has never started and 2 undrafted free agents. The fact McKenzie hasn't played this year means NOTHING, in fact that is good, you really don't want your back-ups to play, unless they have to and when the have to they better be able to protect your damn franchise.

[humanrefutation]

What? The fact that no one has signed McKenzie should indicate to you that he can't play. It's not like the Packers - or any of the other teams for that matter - aren't aware he's sitting out there.

[Kerb Hohl]

Kareem McKenzie isn't on a roster. He's not riding on the pine...nobody has signed him.

This reminds me of the guy on firetedthompson.com freaking out about how we were going into 2010 with ONLY unproven Tramon Williams, Bush, and Shields at corner opposite Woodson.

Not even saying that I think our backup linemen are any sort of strength, but I don't think there is a team in the league that can feel comfortable in their backup at every position. We have probably 7 DBs that could start in a team's nickel package on our roster. We lost 2 Pro Bowl WRs and still had incredible passing threats. The LB depth is rounding out. It's really hard to have EVERY position stacked anymore. I'm not excusing TT because of injuries on the O-line but I think without those we'd have an OK situation on the line. You're going to get hit somewhere every year, this happens to be it.

[xTitan]

i came up with 1 damn name in 2 minutes...and that is what you are concentrating on? They could have signed someone last spring, when they made the horrible mistake on Saturday, they could have drafted an offensive lineman before the 7th round....this does not change the fact that EDS sux sh*! and two undrafted FA offensive lineman are clearly not ready to play, you went into this season with no back-up OT.....and your best player by far is your QB, that is a huge mistake. Back in 96' Bruce Wilkerson was nothing but an old OT picked up off the scrap heap and he did a very solid job on the Superbowl champion Packer team. This team would be much better off moving Lang back to guard and finding an OT somewhere, bring Clifton back for a workout, I don't care, but right now you have 3 weak positions on your OL and that is not deniable.

[LUKE23]

For as non-spectacular as Lang is at RG, I HIGHLY doubt they could find someone currently on the scrap heap that would do a better job.

[emunney]

What's the story on Marcus McNeill? He retired, but how committed is he to that?

[Kerb Hohl]

Look man. I don't think Thompson neglects to sign "veteran" backups because he has steel balls, is cheap, or too full of himself to bring in someone else. I think it's because he's an NFL GM that knows the talent he has and likes to keep it in the system.

The fact that the list of guys you're going to come up with has been signed by nobody else in the NFL should tell you something. There are no obvious answers come August when trying to fill these holes. Yeah, maybe drafting an extra lineman earlier, but I'm not sure there.

You're make some desperation grasps with Chad Clifton here. What makes you think you know more than Thompson or the Philly GM or anyone else with some line weakness that we should give Clifton a call? Maybe Clifton is just washed up? TT has shown that he'll give an old lineman a call if he has something left in the tank (Tauscher). I think the fact that he hasn't called probably says that Clifton is going to get worked because he is simply too old.

[xTitan]

Look man. I don't think Thompson neglects to sign "veteran" backups because he has steel balls, is cheap, or too full of himself to bring in someone else. I think it's because he's an NFL GM that knows the talent he has and likes to keep it in the system.

The fact that the list of guys you're going to come up with has been signed by nobody else in the NFL should tell you something. There are no obvious answers come August when trying to fill these holes. Yeah, maybe drafting an extra lineman earlier, but I'm not sure there.

You're make some desperation grasps with Chad Clifton here. What makes you think you know more than Thompson or the Philly GM or anyone else with some line weakness that we should give Clifton a call? Maybe Clifton is just washed up? TT has shown that he'll give an old lineman a call if he has something left in the tank (Tauscher). I think the fact that he hasn't called probably says that Clifton is going to get worked because he is simply too old.

Clifton might be washed up but how can you watch the line get dominated yesterday and not be concerned in a major way? I stood up for TT when very few did, but he has made a major mistake with the three back-up OL he has on this roster....TT does not walk on water and he simply made a bad mistake and has put the entire franchise (Rodgers) in danger. The answers didn't have to come in august, they could have come in April or anytime after the season. How many teams in the NFL have 2 undrafted rookie OL on their roster?

[xTitan]

For as non-spectacular as Lang is at RG, I HIGHLY doubt they could find someone currently on the scrap heap that would do a better job.

I want Lang to go back to guard, on his worst day he is far better than EDS.

[Kerb Hohl]

I would be willing to bet several teams have several undrafted guys on their bench.

How dominated did the line get? Rodgers got sacked 3 times by a really good defensive line. That seems par for the course in the NFL.

[xTitan]

I would be willing to bet several teams have several undrafted guys on their bench.

How dominated did the line get? Rodgers got sacked 3 times by a really good defensive line. That seems par for the course in the NFL.

I said undrafted OL rookies......you may want to go back and watch that pocket collapse constantly. Detroit has the worst defensive backfield in the NFL and the best QB in the NFL didn't have time to exploit it.

[humanrefutation]

I just don't get your point, xTitan. I think everyone here is agreement that we wish the line was better. What I'm taking issue with is your first claim that Thompson should've brought in a serviceable veteran for depth. The flaw with your claim is your assumption that there was somebody out there worth bringing in. We asked you to name some folks - because it was your claim, of course - and the names you've mentioned have been extreme reaches at best.

I don't have a problem with critiquing TT's actions (or inactions, like in the Lynch case). But, if you think Thompson has **** up, and you're making the claim he could've done better, then provide us with an contextual example of what he could've realistically done to address the issue.

[Kerb Hohl]

I know their secondary was quite banged up, but it seems like Green Bay wasn't the ONLY team in the NFL to struggle throwing all over Detroit.

[xTitan]

I just don't get your point, xTitan. I think everyone here is agreement that we wish the line was better. What I'm taking issue with is your first claim that Thompson should've brought in a serviceable veteran for depth. The flaw with your claim is your assumption that there was somebody out there worth bringing in. We asked you to name some folks - because it was your claim, of course - and the names you've mentioned have been extreme reaches at best.

I don't have a problem with critiquing TT's actions (or inactions, like in the Lynch case). But, if you think Thompson has **** up, and you're making the claim he could've done better, then provide us with an contextual example of what he could've realistically done to address the issue.

LOl...I am not a GM, I don't have time to go back to last March and do research but you are telling me that no team in the NFL picked up any veteran line depth after last season? There is not 1 vet OT that was available who would not be better than the three back-up OL on this team? So no team has added anyone, every team has bad back-up OL and no vets? Let's assume that ridiculous absurd statement is true.....then TT should have drafted an OL higher then he did.

[LUKE23]

I want Lang to go back to guard, on his worst day he is far better than EDS.

That only makes sense if you can upgrade RT from Lang, which has almost no chance of happening at this point in the season. I'd much rather be strong at RT than LG. There is no option for us to move Lang back to LG AND upgrade RT. You have to pick one.

[Kerb Hohl]

Yes, in a perfect world there might have been 3-4 guys out on the market that are better fits as backup linemen and who knows in the draft. There are also 31 other NFL teams vying for these precious resources.

That said, Ted, in early returns, seems to have hit a 450 foot home run on this year's draft in the mid-later rounds and UDFA. Perry could make it an excellent draft but we'll have to see on that one.

I have no idea what we could expect from Datko if there was another injury.

[xTitan]

I want Lang to go back to guard, on his worst day he is far better than EDS.

That only makes sense if you can upgrade RT from Lang, which has almost no chance of happening at this point in the season. I'd much rather be strong at RT than LG. There is no option for us to move Lang back to LG AND upgrade RT. You have to pick one.

which is why they are in trouble.....they have no choice at all, which has been my point from the start. The problem is that Lang is not a good RT and the Packers are considerbly weaker at 2 positions, but you are correct they have zero options at this point.

[LUKE23]

Again though, I think if there were better options out there they would have been added. Any OT worth anything was on rosters.

[emunney]

I don't think it's really going out on a limb to say that GMs are not 100% accurate (even TT) and that there is probably somebody out there who could help us. It's a needle in a haystack proposition, though. TT might have the best magnifying glass but it's still pretty tough to do.

Where we might have a complaint with TT is if he doesn't believe that improvement could be out there, or if he's happy with how these guys performed. I don't see him as the kind of guy who's easily satisfied, though.

[crkone]

The whole line was terrible together. There is no one on the street better than them right now though. Don't forget anyone on the street has to learn the very intricate offense the Packers run.