A tale of two NFC North Cities

[Deleted member 6794]

I would have replaced Campen about 5 years ago. That's right: the Championship year. That line ranked 23rd in run blocking, 21st in pass blocking. I suspect it was Philbin that turned around the o line at the end of 2010, not Campen. Campen's lines have been consistently poor. Final DVOA rankings on the 2015 offensive line has our Packers at no. 25th in run blocking; 23rd in pass blocking. Worse than Campen's previous 8 lines that have averaged 17 in run blocking and 19 in pass blocking. That "one of the best" o lines in 2014 ranked 8th in run blocking; 13th in pass blocking. So it was one of Campen's best, but hardly elite in the NFL. Meanwhile Rogers gets another year older. Zimmer won't stand for it; MM seems just fine with it. I'm tired of it.

I like most of the Football Outsiders metrics but I don't think their adjusted line yards and adjusted sack rate is a great way to measure an offensive line's success.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I am about as big of Rodgers fan as there is but there is no doubt he does should some blame for sack numbers. Although last year I won have put more blame on the slowest wrs to ever play together. The amount of time he had to wait for those guys to get separation was insane.

It's true Rodgers deserves blame for a portion of the sacks he's taken but I agree with Mondio that his mobility has led to him avoiding way more than he's responsible for.

 

[bigbubbatd]

It's true Rodgers deserves blame for a portion of the sacks he's taken but I agree with Mondio that his mobility has led to him avoiding way more than he's responsible for.

Yeah that is true. Mondio is probably right. I just don't feel like our oline is that bad. I think last year was a perfect storm of injuries, slow wide receivers, a poor running game and a coach who gave up on the run. I think the Oline was set up to fail. The year before they were very good. They need more depth though

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yeah that is true. Mondio is probably right. I just don't feel like our oline is that bad. I think last year was a perfect storm of injuries, slow wide receivers, a poor running game and a coach who gave up on the run. I think the Oline was set up to fail. The year before they were very good. They need more depth though

I agree that I'm fine with the starting lineup as well. There's no doubt Thompson needs to add a reliable backup tackle though.

 

[JBlood]

I like most of the Football Outsiders metrics but I don't think their adjusted line yards and adjusted sack rate is a great way to measure an offensive line's success.

No stat is perfect, that's for sure. But I think DVOA comes as close as anything. And in the case of the Packers' offensive line play it matches what I've seen (admittedly not expert) on the field for the last 10 years. We're not a great blocking or tackling team, which used to be important basics in the game. It's fortunate that we've had HOF quarterback play for the last 30 years that has kept us competitive.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

No stat is perfect, that's for sure. But I think DVOA comes as close as anything. And in the case of the Packers' offensive line play it matches what I've seen (admittedly not expert) on the field for the last 10 years. We're not a great blocking or tackling team, which used to be important basics in the game. It's fortunate that we've had HOF quarterback play for the last 30 years that has kept us competitive.

Football Outsiders doesn't use DVOA to measure an offensive line's performance though but adjusted line yards, which is mostly dependant on a RB's performance, as well as adjusted sack rate, which doesn't consider other players responsible for a sack and doesn't include all sorts of pressure in its metric.

 

[PikeBadger]

I'm not at all displeased with the o-line play the last two years. Rodgers hangs onto the ball longer than any QB in the league. He earns some of his own sacks. That said, with 9 picks, I expect to see 1-2 of them used on O-linemen.

 

[bigbubbatd]

I agree that I'm fine with the starting lineup as well. There's no doubt Thompson needs to add a reliable backup tackle though.

Yeah with what 7 picks in the first 4 rounds would assume at least one will be a tackle. If TT does well in this draft he could really fortify the o-line, d-line, and hopefully linebacker. I hope a majority of the 7 picks are at those positions

 

[adambr2]

Immediate need picks that need to be addressed this year and early: ILB, DT

High priority but we can get by without one early if the draft unfolds that way: OT, OG, DE

Low priority, Nice to have, but not need to have. Maybe a late round project: RB, WR, TE, OLB, CB

Luxury pick only, no near-term need : QB, S, C, any special teams

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yeah with what 7 picks in the first 4 rounds would assume at least one will be a tackle. If TT does well in this draft he could really fortify the o-line, d-line, and hopefully linebacker. I hope a majority of the 7 picks are at those positions

The Packers have six picks in the first four rounds with three of them coming in the fourth. I agree that hopefully inside linebacker and the defensive line will be adequately addressed early in the draft.

Immediate need picks that need to be addressed this year and early: ILB, DT

High priority but we can get by without one early if the draft unfolds that way: OT, OG, DE

Low priority, Nice to have, but not need to have. Maybe a late round project: RB, WR, TE, OLB, CB

Luxury pick only, no near-term need : QB, S, C, any special teams

With Guion being able to play nose tackle and Pennel hopefully ready to step in after his suspension I don't necessarily agree that the Packers need to draft one. There's no doubt the defensive line has to be addressed early but I would be fine with a defensive end as well.

In addition I would rank outside linebacker and tight end higher on the priority list.

 

[adambr2]

I guess I figure we are pretty set at OLB, but this time next year we may be pretty set at OLB. I'm pretty comfortable with Rodgers and Cook at TE but Cook is only here on a 1 year deal so I can understand where you're coming from on both.

We could probably bring back Mike Neal for close to the minimum at this point if we want more OLB depth. At least I would hope it would be close to the minimum because anything more wouldn't be worth it.

 

[bigbubbatd]

The Packers have six picks in the first four rounds with three of them coming in the fourth. I agree that hopefully inside linebacker and the defensive line will be addressed...

Thanks for the correction. Maybe tt should just wait until the 4th or 5th round for oline anyway. He has done pretty well there with Sitton, Lang, Bahktiari, Lindsey, and Tretter all in those rounds.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I guess I figure we are pretty set at OLB, but this time next year we may be pretty set at OLB. I'm pretty comfortable with Rodgers and Cook at TE but Cook is only here on a 1 year deal so I can understand where you're coming from on both.

We could probably bring back Mike Neal for close to the minimum at this point if we want more OLB depth. At least I would hope it would be close to the minimum because anything more wouldn't be worth it.

As you correctly implied I'm not concerned about the depth at outside linebacker for this season but with Peppers, Perry, Datone and Elliott set to become free agents in 2017 the Packers should already think about addressing the position in this year's draft as well.

 

[bigbubbatd]

As you correctly implied I'm not concerned about the depth at outside linebacker for this season but with Peppers, Perry, Datone and Elliott set to become free agents in 2017 the Packers should already think about addressing the position in this year's draft as well.

I agree on the olb position. At first I didn't see the need to draft one but with clay getting older and those 4 as free agents it seems like a need. As long as good value is there I would probably of ilb, dl, Olb, ol, dl, then ilb or ol. That probably means tt will draft a rb, wr, cb, and qb