Poll: Packers pick at #26
Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25, humanrefutation
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
- [RCG]
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,047
- And1: 135
- Joined: May 24, 2010
- Location: Saint Paul
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
Bulaga isn't a LT to me, at all.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
- crkone
- RealGM
- Posts: 29,151
- And1: 9,763
- Joined: Aug 16, 2006
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
I don't know how anyone on the line besides Sitton has a set status as starter or backup. The line was terrible this year even if Rodgers was responsible for 14 of the 51 sacks taken.
Code: Select all
o- - - \o __|
o/ /| vv`\
/| | |
| / \_ |
/ \ | |
/ | |
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 16,041
- And1: 189
- Joined: Jun 28, 2008
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
crkone wrote:I don't know how anyone on the line besides Sitton has a set status as starter or backup. The line was terrible this year even if Rodgers was responsible for 14 of the 51 sacks taken.
Lang was playing well before he got dinged up. Bulaga was playing alright as well before he got hurt.
I don't think anybody believes EDS or Newhouse are locked in to their spots.
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
- crkone
- RealGM
- Posts: 29,151
- And1: 9,763
- Joined: Aug 16, 2006
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
Bucksfans1and2 wrote:crkone wrote:I don't know how anyone on the line besides Sitton has a set status as starter or backup. The line was terrible this year even if Rodgers was responsible for 14 of the 51 sacks taken.
Lang was playing well before he got dinged up. Bulaga was playing alright as well before he got hurt.
I don't think anybody believes EDS or Newhouse are locked in to their spots.
Bulaga wasn't playing good (check the Seattle game), and Lang is always hurt. Bulaga was having his worst year and now he is Bo Jackson'd.
Code: Select all
o- - - \o __|
o/ /| vv`\
/| | |
| / \_ |
/ \ | |
/ | |
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
- RiotPunch
- RealGM
- Posts: 27,689
- And1: 18,072
- Joined: Jul 05, 2009
- Location: LA
-
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
I think the Packers will opt to stay with EDS for low-end starter money rather than spending a high draft choice on a non-premium position. However, I think we will take a lineman early. Call me crazy, but I think EDS's job is safer than Lang or Bulaga's. (I do sound crazy)
I bet we take a guard like Warford and then either try to get Lang to learn the center position or use him as a swing lineman or we take a tackle like Fluker or something and then bump the pick or Bulaga to Lang's guard spot. Bulaga was bad last year and is a slightly above average RT, he would be a pro bowler at LG, I think.
I bet we take a guard like Warford and then either try to get Lang to learn the center position or use him as a swing lineman or we take a tackle like Fluker or something and then bump the pick or Bulaga to Lang's guard spot. Bulaga was bad last year and is a slightly above average RT, he would be a pro bowler at LG, I think.
#FreeChuckDiesel
Bucksmaniac wrote:I'm sorry, but I'm starting to sour on Giannis
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
- emunney
- RealGM
- Posts: 62,883
- And1: 41,262
- Joined: Feb 22, 2005
- Location: where takes go to be pampered
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
Could Fluker just play guard?
Here are more legal notices regarding the Posts
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,145
- And1: 107
- Joined: Feb 15, 2007
- Location: san diego
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
Regardless of liking him or not the recent stats in McGinn's article clearly identifiies Newhouse as our weakest link on the OL. The solution is either 1) a healthy effective Sherrod 2) drafting a LT 1st or 2nd 3) Datko comes out of nowhere 4) moving Bulaga there. Drafting a RT makes no sense if opposed to moving Bulaga left and besides Barclay is there also. Moving Bulaga who is a fine RT and may be a fine LT or Lang who is clearly a better G than OT makes no sense. There is just no need to try drafting a starting G. Drafting a C to compete w/ EDS who can also play G in 4th rd or later seems prudent as VanRoten is unproven.
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
- RiotPunch
- RealGM
- Posts: 27,689
- And1: 18,072
- Joined: Jul 05, 2009
- Location: LA
-
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
emunney wrote:Could Fluker just play guard?
I personally think he could, but people smarter than me have told me that he's strictly a RT prospect. He measured out a little shorter and a little heavier than he was thought to be at the senior bowl though, which I think helps his case for being a guard prospect. He's never played there before, but I don't see why he couldn't excel there.
I like him though. He is a nasty, mean mountain of a man. He doesn't try to block, he tries to lay fools out.
#FreeChuckDiesel
Bucksmaniac wrote:I'm sorry, but I'm starting to sour on Giannis
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
- ReasonablySober
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 107,864
- And1: 42,160
- Joined: Dec 02, 2001
- Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
- Contact:
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
RiotPunch wrote:emunney wrote:Could Fluker just play guard?
I personally think he could, but people smarter than me have told me that he's strictly a RT prospect. He measured out a little shorter and a little heavier than he was thought to be at the senior bowl though, which I think helps his case for being a guard prospect. He's never played there before, but I don't see why he couldn't excel there.
I like him though. He is a nasty, mean mountain of a man. He doesn't try to block, he tries to lay fools out.
I've read that he actually impressed with his body at the SB.
As for Fluker, I was one of the two that voted for him. That's not a draft board I'd be in love with, so I'd go after a guy with upside.
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 42,327
- And1: 2,551
- Joined: Dec 05, 2005
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
I wouldn't mind Fluker assuming we believe he can develop into at least a serviceable pass blocker.
The stuff I've read about Minter makes him sound good too... and I'd love an upgrade over AJ Hawk at ILB.
The stuff I've read about Minter makes him sound good too... and I'd love an upgrade over AJ Hawk at ILB.
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
- [RCG]
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,047
- And1: 135
- Joined: May 24, 2010
- Location: Saint Paul
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
Fluker would benefit immensely just working on his footwork from now until the combine. Every day all day. If he can show improvement on his sliding (pass protection) he's a lock for the first round. He's devastating as a run-blocker but less than serviceable in pass protection. If Ted believes that he can be the RT I'm all for it. We can then move Bulaga to LG. Bring Lang in as an extra tackle for some heavy sets and maybe, just maybe we can actually convert a 3rd-and-1 by running the ball.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,145
- And1: 107
- Joined: Feb 15, 2007
- Location: san diego
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
Newz wrote:I wouldn't mind Fluker assuming we believe he can develop into at least a serviceable pass blocker.
The stuff I've read about Minter makes him sound good too... and I'd love an upgrade over AJ Hawk at ILB.
Fluker = Carimi = bust. I hear the flames but several 1st rdrs bust every year. He's likely one IMHO.
IF a true 3-4 DE that had a pass rush were available I'd take #1. But I feel those guys will be long gone.
If Minter is fluid & fast & good in pass coverage as well as run I'd take him. IF he's great against run but slow & stiff in coverage then no thanks. We need ILB that can cover TEs as well as shed blockers and make violent tackles that stop runners in their tracks. Anything less is too little improvement.
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
- RiotPunch
- RealGM
- Posts: 27,689
- And1: 18,072
- Joined: Jul 05, 2009
- Location: LA
-
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
DrugBust wrote:RiotPunch wrote:emunney wrote:Could Fluker just play guard?
I personally think he could, but people smarter than me have told me that he's strictly a RT prospect. He measured out a little shorter and a little heavier than he was thought to be at the senior bowl though, which I think helps his case for being a guard prospect. He's never played there before, but I don't see why he couldn't excel there.
I like him though. He is a nasty, mean mountain of a man. He doesn't try to block, he tries to lay fools out.
I've read that he actually impressed with his body at the SB.
As for Fluker, I was one of the two that voted for him. That's not a draft board I'd be in love with, so I'd go after a guy with upside.
Yeah, not saying he had a bad weigh-in, his body and muscle mass looked good, just different than his projected measurables. He was previously listed as 6'6'' 335 lbs and weighed in at at 6'4'' 355 lbs.
#FreeChuckDiesel
Bucksmaniac wrote:I'm sorry, but I'm starting to sour on Giannis
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
- [RCG]
- Head Coach
- Posts: 7,047
- And1: 135
- Joined: May 24, 2010
- Location: Saint Paul
Re: Poll: Packers pick at #26
If we stick with the zone running scheme we'll even be looking at Fluker, he seems much more suited to a power running game.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt