Future of the O-Line

[RRyder]

Spriggs hasn't even played a regular season game yet. How do you even know he can do the job? I don't believe the line is a place to be chintzy. Especially with Rodgers now in his thirties.

Do you want to rely on Bulaga staying healthy? You guys seem to forget what happened when he got hurt. Bad news, is what happened. Rodgers getting creamed is what happened. The same could be said when Bak got hurt. The packers had to double team the DE on that side and Rodgers still was getting chased in about one second.

Well when it comes to Spriggs I'll continue to say if he looks the part at LT. In other words if he keeps looking good and giving every inclination he can step in then move on from Bakhtiari. I'm not saying if Spriggs looks bad do it.

As for the part concerning injuries you can make that same exact argument for any position on the team. It's resource management. Paying 9 million simply to ensure depth if you don't have to is a bad idea. Once again that's what the draft is for. Let Bakhtiari walk. Draft another guy in 4-5th round next year and there's your depth to go along with yet another Tackle they drafted for depth this year.

It's not like the choices are "let Bakhtiari walk and have nothing but trash on the bench" or "spend 9+ million in order to have 3 starting caliber Tackles". I'll take door number 3 if Spriggs keeps looking good and that's "Let Bakhtiari walk, add a high comp pick in two years, use the saved cap room to resign other guys and still have a pair of draft picks backing up our starting Tackles"

 

[Poppa San]

Bak recently made it clear that he is a LT, period, and will not consider playing another position.

Of course he's going to say that. For one, it's the only NFL position he's played. And two, this is a contract year. LT's make the big $$$$$ on the OL.

... Draft another guy in 4-5th round next year and there's your depth to go along with yet another Tackle they drafted for depth this year. It's not like the choices are "let Bakhtiari walk and have nothing but trash on the bench" or "spend 9+ million in order to have 3 starting caliber Tackles". I'll take door number 3 if Spriggs keeps looking good and that's "Let Bakhtiari walk, add a high comp pick in two years, use the saved cap room to resign other guys and still have a pair of draft picks backing up our starting Tackles"

I'm fairly sure this is why Murphy will be sitting on the practice squad this season. To be groomed as the backup tackle nest year.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

If you pay Bakhtiari when you have a more then adequate replacement just simply then to have Spriggs as the backup then yes you're paying to have the luxury no matter whos starting.

That 9 million can and should be spent in MUCH better places than ensuring that the Packers have depth on the Oline. That's what the draft is for.

Paying 9+ million to a player when you have a younger, cheaper and "possibly" better player waiting in the wings is NOT a good idea just to ensure depth

Bull.
We drafted bahk already. You dont hit on a lt for the first time in half a dacade, and then let them go. Even if you have a rookie who could replace him....

Fact is, we have a future hall of fame qb, who is entering the later part of his career.... Its time to protect him....

What we dont need is a replay of last year where the tackles go down and the whole offense looks like deuce. Peaking with rodgers getting injured against the broncos.... Who won it all, and most certainly would have been pooping our oline out the next morning after coffee, if we managed to beat az and carolina...

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

If Spriggs is capable of adequately replacing Bakhtiari there's no reason to pay the starter $9 million a year as the difference in performance doesn't justify spending that kind of money.

Who backs up the 2nd year lt next year then? Or do we have to wait another 3 years to draft the next good lt?

Meanwhile.... Rodgers decides to retire early because managment doesnt keep good olinemen around......

 

[RRyder]

Bull.
We drafted bahk already. You dont hit on a lt for the first time in half a dacade, and then let them go. Even if you have a rookie who could replace him....

Fact is, we have a future hall of fame qb, who is entering the later part of his career.... Its time to protect him....

What we dont need is a replay of last year where the tackles go down and the whole offense looks like deuce. Peaking with rodgers getting injured against the broncos.... Who won it all, and most certainly would have been pooping our oline out the next morning after coffee, if we managed to beat az and carolina...

Well played. I lay out a reasoned response with a plan in place to why there's little reason to shell out 9+ mill a year if there's a replacement available and you're first response is "bull" while once again falling back on an argument that can be used for EVERY single position on the team. Well played.

Probably shouldve shelled out top dollar for Hayward to then cause an injury or two in the secondary and we could be hurting.

Once again you don't shell out that kind of cash simply to have the LUXURY of 3 starting Tackles if you don't have to

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm fairly sure this is why Murphy will be sitting on the practice squad this season. To be groomed as the backup tackle nest year.

Murphy lined up at right tackle with the second team offensive line during yesterday's game vs. the Raiders after only practicing for some days after coming back from a concussion. That indicates he might make the final roster this season.

Bull.
We drafted bahk already. You dont hit on a lt for the first time in half a dacade, and then let them go. Even if you have a rookie who could replace him....

Fact is, we have a future hall of fame qb, who is entering the later part of his career.... Its time to protect him....

What we dont need is a replay of last year where the tackles go down and the whole offense looks like deuce. Peaking with rodgers getting injured against the broncos.... Who won it all, and most certainly would have been pooping our oline out the next morning after coffee, if we managed to beat az and carolina...

It should be pretty obvious that with a hard salary cap in place teams shouldn't spend $9 million a year on a starter that could be adequately replaced by a guy still on his rookie contract. There's no doubt the front office has to do a better job of adding quality depth at the position than they did last year but drafting Spriggs and Murphy was a step in the right direction.

Who backs up the 2nd year lt next year then? Or do we have to wait another 3 years to draft the next good lt?

The Packers should spend at least a mid round draft pick on a talented tackle to backup Spriggs in next year's draft if the team decides to let Bakhtiari walk in free agency.

With that being said Spriggs has to significantly improve over yesterday's performance against the Raiders and Khalil Mack to justify naming him the starter in 2017.

 

[Arthur Squires]

Murphy had some nice looking blocks for his 1st game. I am fairly certain he makes the 53.

 

[JK64]

Well when it comes to Spriggs I'll continue to say if he looks the part at LT. In other words if he keeps looking good and giving every inclination he can step in then move on from Bakhtiari. I'm not saying if Spriggs looks bad do it.

As for the part concerning injuries you can make that same exact argument for any position on the team. It's resource management. Paying 9 million simply to ensure depth if you don't have to is a bad idea. Once again that's what the draft is for. Let Bakhtiari walk. Draft another guy in 4-5th round next year and there's your depth to go along with yet another Tackle they drafted for depth this year.

It's not like the choices are "let Bakhtiari walk and have nothing but trash on the bench" or "spend 9+ million in order to have 3 starting caliber Tackles". I'll take door number 3 if Spriggs keeps looking good and that's "Let Bakhtiari walk, add a high comp pick in two years, use the saved cap room to resign other guys and still have a pair of draft picks backing up our starting Tackles"

How is Spriggs workin' out for you today.

I am not ready to pronounce Spriggs starter after what I saw yesterday against a good DE. Holy Cow, he would get Rodgers killed.

 

[RRyder]

How is Spriggs workin' out for you today.

I am not ready to pronounce Spriggs starter after what I saw yesterday against a good DE. Holy Cow, he would get Rodgers killed.

Well you should once again read the first line of my post that you quoted.

Unless a rough day against Khalil Mack in his second day out is enough to pronounce a career over. Little suprised any would categorize Mack as just "good" actually

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Well you should once again read the first line of my post that you quoted.

Unless a rough day against Khalil Mack in his second day out is enough to pronounce a career over. Little suprised any would categorize Mack as just "good" actually

I didnt mean to come off sounding so disrespectful before, with the bull comment. But i think bahk needs to be a priority.

I was pushing during the off season to let bahk go... But after a little real life football, i realized our position..... We are screwed. We are going to lose all sorys of tallent. But what we can not afford to lose is rodgers to injury again...

But seriously, we havnt had a legit lt since clifton!!! Now that bahk ,our best lt prospect (by far), spent 4 years of hard knocks development. Now we are going to replace him at 25 years old?!?!

I think its more important to keep our lt, than it is to keep either guard.....
I could even be ok with all three leaving (tretter too), as long as we dont have to start from scratch at lt...

Ideally we keep bahk and lacy imo. And draft some fresh bruising guards...

 

[Arthur Squires]

I didnt mean to come off sounding so disrespectful before, with the bull comment. But i think bahk needs to be a priority.

I was pushing during the off season to let bahk go... But after a little real life football, i realized our position..... We are screwed. We are going to lose all sorys of tallent. But what we can not afford to lose is rodgers to injury again...

But seriously, we havnt had a legit lt since clifton!!! Now that bahk ,our best lt prospect (by far), spent 4 years of hard knocks development. Now we are going to replace him at 25 years old?!?!

I think its more important to keep our lt, than it is to keep either guard.....
I could even be ok with all three leaving (tretter too), as long as we dont have to start from scratch at lt...

Ideally we keep bahk and lacy imo. And draft some fresh bruising guards...

Bak and Hyde over Lacy IMO we have so much talent with ending contracts it's a shame to watch any go

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Bak and Hyde over Lacy IMO we have so much talent with ending contracts it's a shame to watch any go

Hyde seemed to mark the secondaries change to being better at tackling... Id hate to underestimate his impact until its painfully obvious we made a mistake letting him go...

But lacy did the same thing to our running game. After years of below average production imo. I am not a basher. I thought he did fine last year, considering how the rest of the offense was playing... He looked great so far this presseason.

 

[Arthur Squires]

Hyde seemed to mark the secondaries change to being better at tackling... Id hate to underestimate his impact until its painfully obvious we made a mistake letting him go...

But lacy did the same thing to our running game. After years of below average production imo. I am not a basher. I thought he did fine last year, considering how the rest of the offense was playing... He looked great so far this presseason.

I agree Lacy looks sharp thus far. I have a feeling he is going to put up career numbers. I don't argue he is the best back we've had since Ahman. My fear, his big year prices him out of GreenBay. Hopefully we draft a good prospect next season just to be safe at RB.

 

[RRyder]

I didnt mean to come off sounding so disrespectful before, with the bull comment. But i think bahk needs to be a priority.

I was pushing during the off season to let bahk go... But after a little real life football, i realized our position..... We are screwed. We are going to lose all sorys of tallent. But what we can not afford to lose is rodgers to injury again...

But seriously, we havnt had a legit lt since clifton!!! Now that bahk ,our best lt prospect (by far), spent 4 years of hard knocks development. Now we are going to replace him at 25 years old?!?!

I think its more important to keep our lt, than it is to keep either guard.....
I could even be ok with all three leaving (tretter too), as long as we dont have to start from scratch at lt...

Ideally we keep bahk and lacy imo. And draft some fresh bruising guards...

It's not that I'm opposed to bringing back Bakhtiari. Rather that paying a guy 9+ mill per should be avoided if possible regardless of depth. That depends on how Spriggs looks throughout the year thoug

 

[Arthur Squires]

It's not that I'm opposed to bringing back Bakhtiari. Rather that paying a guy 9+ mill per should be avoided if possible regardless of depth. That depends on how Spriggs looks throughout the year thoug

What if both Bak and Bulaga stay healthy all year and we don't see Spriggs play? Are you still comfortable letting Bak walk?

 

[RRyder]

What if both Bak and Bulaga stay healthy all year and we don't see Spriggs play? Are you still comfortable letting Bak walk?

It's not what "we" see then. It's what the coaches see day in day out

 

[Deleted member 6794]

How is Spriggs workin' out for you today.

I am not ready to pronounce Spriggs starter after what I saw yesterday against a good DE. Holy Cow, he would get Rodgers killed.

Khalil Mack is one of the best edge rushers in the league. Spriggs struggling against him at this stage of his career shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody.

I didnt mean to come off sounding so disrespectful before, with the bull comment. But i think bahk needs to be a priority.

I was pushing during the off season to let bahk go... But after a little real life football, i realized our position..... We are screwed. We are going to lose all sorys of tallent. But what we can not afford to lose is rodgers to injury again...

But seriously, we havnt had a legit lt since clifton!!! Now that bahk ,our best lt prospect (by far), spent 4 years of hard knocks development. Now we are going to replace him at 25 years old?!?!

I think its more important to keep our lt, than it is to keep either guard.....
I could even be ok with all three leaving (tretter too), as long as we dont have to start from scratch at lt...

Ideally we keep bahk and lacy imo. And draft some fresh bruising guards...

First of all it took only one season for the Packers to adequately replace Clufton with Bakhtiari.

While in a perfect world the team would be able to re-sign all of their impending free agents it doesn't work that way with the league's salary cap in place. There's no way a team being successful over the long haul by spending $9 million a season to re-sign a starter when having an adequate replacement on the roster still on his rookie deal.

Thompson trading up and spending a second round pick on Spriggs makes it pretty obvious the Packers plan on him being the future starter at left tackle.

In addition the Packers don't have the depth at guard necessary to let both Sitton and Lang walk away in free agency.

As I've said repeatedly the Packers should be extremely reluctant to sign Lacy to a lucrative long-term contract after what happened last season.

Bak and Hyde over Lacy IMO we have so much talent with ending contracts it's a shame to watch any go

Out of the three players you mentioned re-signing Hyde should be a priority.

But lacy did the same thing to our running game. After years of below average production imo. I am not a basher. I thought he did fine last year, considering how the rest of the offense was playing... He looked great so far this presseason.

There's absolutely no denying Lacy struggled mightily in 2015. There's no reason to trust him to stay in shape once he signs a big contract.

I agree Lacy looks sharp thus far. I have a feeling he is going to put up career numbers. I don't argue he is the best back we've had since Ahman. My fear, his big year prices him out of GreenBay. Hopefully we draft a good prospect next season just to be safe at RB.

I'm afraid of Lacy putting up career numbers this season resulting in the Packers feeling obligated to sign him to a long-term contract including significant guaranteed money and him showing up to camp looking like Gilbert Brown.

 

[JK64]

What if both Bak and Bulaga stay healthy all year and we don't see Spriggs play? Are you still comfortable letting Bak walk?

I'm not.

Or...if Spriggs does get some playing time and looks like a turnstile and has Rodgers running for his life half the time.

I don't want to hear any excuses, like, well, he was playing against a good DE.

 

[RRyder]

I'm not.

Or...if Spriggs does get some playing time and looks like a turnstile and has Rodgers running for his life half the time.

I don't want to hear any excuses, like, well, he was playing against a good DE.

You've been clear. It doesn't matter how Spriggs looks. You want Bakhtiari back

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Lt is much harder to replace than guards. That should be the logic imo.

 

[Half Empty]

I'm not.

Or...if Spriggs does get some playing time and looks like a turnstile and has Rodgers running for his life half the time.

I don't want to hear any excuses, like, well, he was playing against a good DE.

Most of us don't like to hear them, but for someone in Spriggs' situation, that's a pretty good one. Do we get to say 'no excuses' for Bak if he has trouble with an All-pro defender?

 

[PackerDNA]

You can expect a rookie in his first action, against one of the league's best, to get his head handed to him.
And yes, in the case of Bak or any other vet who is starting and charged with keeping your QB upright, you say "no excuses" if he gets his head handed to him as if he were the rookie.

Most of us don't like to hear them, but for someone in Spriggs' situation, that's a pretty good one. Do we get to say 'no excuses' for Bak if he has trouble with an All-pro defender?

 

[Arthur Squires]

It's not what "we" see then. It's what the coaches see day in day out

Oh I thought we were talking about your opinion. Of course we don't have a say in what the coaches decision is, that's a given.

 

[easyk83]

Bakhtiari is a decent left tackle who excels in pass protection but struggles blocking for the run. But as has been mentioned before if Spriggs proves to be an adequate replacement I would be fine with the Packers letting him walk away in free agency next offseason.

The team most likely won't have the cap space to re-sign both Sitton and Lang. I guess the front office will go with Lang as he's younger and doesn't suffer from chronic back issues.

I agree with RRyder that Tretter isn't a fit to play guard and another team will most likely offer him more money than the Packers to start at center.

Kyle Murphy returned to practice on Monday so it's possible he plays tomorrow vs. the Raiders.



Taylor might be a decent backup but I don't want him to be the starter entering the 2017 season.

I don't know, Lang seems to have a lot of problems with his ankles. I think TT let's atleast one walk and maybe even both like he did with Wahle and Rivera. Tretter probably could play guard but he'd need to bulk up a little, get to around 315 which is where MM likes his OLs to be now adays. Of course maybe he's not enough of a savage to play that position, kinda like Darryn Colledge.

 

[Vrill]

I'm starting to feel better about the future of our OL now with these young guys we have coming up.