Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers roster moves
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 666418"><p>Besides that being a side note to the main point, whether Barkley will or won't was not being argued.</p><p></p><p>The point was that however small the possibility of Rotheram being considered for the roster, Barclay still needs to be considered as a competitive option.</p><p></p><p>While conventional wisdom has 9 OL spots already filled, a heavy number that is reasonable giving the impending free agent class, you might consider why, perhaps, Barclay is still around. Here are a few possibilities:</p><p></p><p>1) An OG spot may open up due to injury before final cut downs, with Barclay perhaps percieved as a more appealing option than Rotheram for 2016.</p><p></p><p>Theoretically, he can back up at RT as well. Sometimes guys take a second season before showing they're over an ACL. In fact, if the Packers are confident he's returned to the level of play when he took over for Bulaga pre-injury, he'd have to be given consideration if Murphy does not work out (see comment below). I'm sure the Packers would want to see if that's the case particularly with no other likely candidate for the RT backup spot other than rookies. Spriggs has to focus on polishing his LT skills since he'll be expected to be ready to start there in 2017. That leaves Murphy or Barclay.</p><p></p><p>2) Murphy could turn out not to be all that. Since when do Packer 6th. round picks live up to the abundant post draft optimism? He wouldn't be the first 6th. round pick to end up on the practice squad, Ringo being one example. The guy has work to do. Maybe more than you think.</p><p></p><p>3) To reiterate, of all the possible trade rumors that could be floated, the one that makes the most sense would be Tretter, assuming confidence is gained in Rotheram as a backup C. Rarely do you see as wide a spread between what a player is worth to the Packers vs. his value to somebody else than you see with Tretter. Such a trade would argue for Rotheram over Barclay, which takes us back to points 1) and 2) as possibilities for him.</p><p></p><p>It would be foolish to actually predict a specific trade, but if one was inclined to speculate about one in particular at this juncture, trading Tretter would it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 666418"] Besides that being a side note to the main point, whether Barkley will or won't was not being argued. The point was that however small the possibility of Rotheram being considered for the roster, Barclay still needs to be considered as a competitive option. While conventional wisdom has 9 OL spots already filled, a heavy number that is reasonable giving the impending free agent class, you might consider why, perhaps, Barclay is still around. Here are a few possibilities: 1) An OG spot may open up due to injury before final cut downs, with Barclay perhaps percieved as a more appealing option than Rotheram for 2016. Theoretically, he can back up at RT as well. Sometimes guys take a second season before showing they're over an ACL. In fact, if the Packers are confident he's returned to the level of play when he took over for Bulaga pre-injury, he'd have to be given consideration if Murphy does not work out (see comment below). I'm sure the Packers would want to see if that's the case particularly with no other likely candidate for the RT backup spot other than rookies. Spriggs has to focus on polishing his LT skills since he'll be expected to be ready to start there in 2017. That leaves Murphy or Barclay. 2) Murphy could turn out not to be all that. Since when do Packer 6th. round picks live up to the abundant post draft optimism? He wouldn't be the first 6th. round pick to end up on the practice squad, Ringo being one example. The guy has work to do. Maybe more than you think. 3) To reiterate, of all the possible trade rumors that could be floated, the one that makes the most sense would be Tretter, assuming confidence is gained in Rotheram as a backup C. Rarely do you see as wide a spread between what a player is worth to the Packers vs. his value to somebody else than you see with Tretter. Such a trade would argue for Rotheram over Barclay, which takes us back to points 1) and 2) as possibilities for him. It would be foolish to actually predict a specific trade, but if one was inclined to speculate about one in particular at this juncture, trading Tretter would it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
My Team Interest is the First Snap
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 9:23 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Bucks 2024-25 Season Thread
Latest: Voyageur
Yesterday at 6:58 PM
Milwaukee Bucks Forum
How much time?
Latest: Thirteen Below
Yesterday at 5:06 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
R
Always Fun To Read These Stories
Latest: rmontro
Yesterday at 2:58 PM
Brett Favre Discussion
2025 Roster - Semi Live Thread
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Yesterday at 1:44 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers roster moves
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
