Week 2: Aaron's march through Atlanta

[PackAttack12]

how about we start of list of teams with 4 quality starters at tackle and then go from there.
We faced one of the absolute best defenses and defensive lines in football with our late round pick filling in at one spot and did ok. Spriggs was a 2nd round pick and has been up and down. Veteran tackles with tread on the tires are cheap and plentiful in the NFL? If bulaga and BahkT can't go, it's not on Ted, LOL because every other team in the league will take the loss of 2 starting tackles right in stride The old man is too stupid to realize the NFL gives the packers roster and salary cap exemptions

For me, the frustration is the fact that we've lost 3 quality o-linemen in the past 12 months, and replaced them with essentially Evans.

I don't think anyone is expecting the team to have 10 quality o-linemen across the board every single year, but there's no doubt that the team was much more equip to handle some injuries and adversity at the position over the past few years, as opposed to our current situation.

I'm not taking a shot at Ted just for no reason. I think all things considered he put together an outstanding offseason and went outside of his element on more than one occasion to bring in some free agents that will/have made an immediate impact on the team. But many on this forum, myself included, called this before training camp even opened. It isn't a hindsight situation we're exercising. The concerns with the o-line have been there all along.

Hopefully Bahk and Bulaga come back 100% healthy and play most of the games this season just like they did last season. Unfortunately it looks as if the depth, or lack thereof, at the position is rearing its ugly head right now.

 

[OldSchool101]

Injuries I can "forgive", those are a part of football and hard to predict. What I was trying to wrap my head around almost 2 weeks ago and even more so today, is the lack of experience the Packers decided to start the season with in regards to OL depth. The only 2 guys with much of any experience were Spriggs and Barclay. Barclay's injury status was known before the cutdowns, as was Sprigg's slow development.
If Bulaga and Bahk can't go and Rodgers gets "blown up" on Sunday, this one is on TT for once again thinking he can build a solid roster with UDFA's and late round picks being forced to start when they aren't ready.
As I said before, I hope I am wrong.

Agreed. It's a small degree of comfort to see that both Bakhtiari and Daniels at least had LP status this week. I really think Kyle Murphy will be fine overall, he passed the test having to deal with Richardson and Bennett all day. I would still give him more help blocking on that side than usual. my main concern is us moving the ball more consistently early in the game. The key to this game will be controlling the clock, mainly in order to limit Atlanta's number of O plays. The best way to do this is moving the chains and taking what they give us with our TE's, slot receivers and RB's underneath. We have to be patient against a formidable Atlanta O.
IF GB can get :33-:35 minutes of clock time I think we can pull this one out. We frustrated Russell last week and he was on the sidelines most of the day pacing. That's the recipe and its exactly what we did to the Falcons in the 2011 playoffs, we didn't even score until 2nd Qtr. Instead of rookie James Starks it's Ty and I like our odds

 

[Mondio]

I agree, this year we seem less able to withstand multiple losses, but it's kind of the nature of the beast. There are going to be ebbs and flows in rosters and positions. You can't continue to pay aging declining players and sometimes your young developing talent scores bigger contracts. Having questions with Spriggs and Murphy are disappointing to say the least. Though Murphy did ok his first time out.

They may very well have missed on Spriggs and it was a bad pick. That would certainly be on Ted. But having your top 3 injured and playing with a 4th and 5th tackle and already starting the drums beating against the GM? There isn't a team in the league that isn't going to feel losing 1 tackle, let alone 2 or 3.

 

[C-Lee]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/zachkruse2/status/908777234651115520[/TWEET]
Pray for us

 

[PackAttack12]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/zachkruse2/status/908777234651115520[/TWEET]
Pray for us

Helluva lot better than doubtful.

 

[C-Lee]

Helluva lot better than doubtful.

True, I forgot they took away the "probable" status. I bet Bakh plays, Bulaga sits out again.

 

[PackAttack12]

Full injury report for Week 2:

Questionable:
Montravius Adams - foot
David Bakhtiari - hamstring
Kentrell Brice - quadriceps/knee
Bryan Bulaga - Ankle/illness
Mike Daniels - hip

Doubtful:
Ahmad Brooks - concussion

Out:
Jason Spriggs - hamstring

 

[PackerDNA]

Murphy reminded me of Bakh in his early days. All of his flaws that I saw (hand placement, sets, etc,) are all fixable with coaching, practice, and time.
All in all, I thought he improved as the game went on, and ended up doing fine.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I agree, this year we seem less able to withstand multiple losses, but it's kind of the nature of the beast. There are going to be ebbs and flows in rosters and positions. You can't continue to pay aging declining players and sometimes your young developing talent scores bigger contracts. Having questions with Spriggs and Murphy are disappointing to say the least. Though Murphy did ok his first time out.

They may very well have missed on Spriggs and it was a bad pick. That would certainly be on Ted. But having your top 3 injured and playing with a 4th and 5th tackle and already starting the drums beating against the GM? There isn't a team in the league that isn't going to feel losing 1 tackle, let alone 2 or 3.

I think we are on the same page when it comes to injuries.....a lot like the CB position last year. They aren't the GM's fault, nor are they really predictable from the standpoint of when they are going to hit, but you usually know, at least 1-2 OL are going to miss time every year. I think where we differ is TT's approach at depth. I get it, you can't have 10 starting quality OL on your team. However, you can look at who you have for depth and say "Oh crap, our only guy with much experience (Barclay) isn't all that good AND he is starting the year on IR. Move to Spriggs.....injured and we know what he has been so far. Anyway, i am just reverbing all my previous posts. TT once again may be forcing the Packers into relying on very inexperienced players. The OL is where young and inexperienced makes me THE most nervous. Unlike the CB position last year, it doesn't mean just surrendering extra TD's, it quite possibly might cause you to lose your FHOF QB. If Bahk and Bulaga aren't playing Sunday......AR is going to be under constant pressure and we have seen what usually happens in that situation, especially on the road in a very noisy stadium.

You were adamant last season about "he couldn't fix the CB position at that point in the season". I'm not convinced that doing something for the long term stability of the OL, other than calling up Pankey from the PS, isn't doable this early in the season.

 

[OldSchool101]

I think we are on the same page when it comes to injuries.....a lot like the CB position last year. They aren't the GM's fault, nor are they really predictable from the standpoint of when they are going to hit, but you usually know, at least 1-2 OL are going to miss time every year. I think where we differ is TT's approach at depth. I get it, you can't have 10 starting quality OL on your team. However, you can look at who you have for depth and say "Oh crap, our only guy with much experience (Barclay) isn't all that good AND he is starting the year on IR. Move to Spriggs.....injured and we know what he has been so far. Anyway, i am just reverbing all my previous posts. TT once again may be forcing the Packers into relying on very inexperienced players. The OL is where young and inexperienced makes me THE most nervous. Unlike the CB position last year, it doesn't mean just surrendering extra TD's, it quite possibly might cause you to lose your FHOF QB. If Bahk and Bulaga aren't playing Sunday......AR is going to be under constant pressure and we have seen what usually happens in that situation, especially on the road in a very noisy stadium.
You were adamant last season about "he couldn't fix the CB position at that point in the season". I'm not convinced that doing something for the long term stability of the OL, other than calling up Pankey from the PS, isn't doable this early in the season.

Ironically, we saw several years ago what a decimated O-line can do to a formidable QB. This is direct result of not having adequate backups on the Line.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Atlanta_Falcons_season#Final_roster

 

[Sky King]

If Rodgers suffers a major injury because there were too many inexperienced players (turnstiles) on the field at the same time there may be torch and pitchfork carrying fans marching on Lambeau looking for the guy who's ultimately responsible.

 

[Mondio]

I think we're ok though if we only had to replace 1 at time. And I think a quality tackle would be more difficult to come by than pretty much any position except QB. If they can find one, great, but most teams don't have 2, let alone guys to trade away. And if they do, what are we going to invest in one? what is acceptable to invest in another LT should BahkT go down and you don't like Spriggs? It certainly doesn't look like BahkT is a long term deal, though he could be, how much more do we invest? How much more do you invest at RT? should we invest more at RT for a back up again, when though a tad shaky to start, was filled adequately by Murphy against a stout front? I'm confident this team can win with a guy missing on the line, we just did and against one of the best Dlines in the league.

You know as well as I do, and every other person that watches and pays attention knows, adequate tackles are not just sitting around. So, with that in mind, are we trading for someone? which one? RT or LT? both? anyone that thinks that is out of their ****ing minds to say the least and that was me being nice

I'm not thrilled with Pankey either, but anybody thinking we should have a BahkT and Bulaga backing up BahkT and Bulaga well, let's just say you need a class or 2 in expectation management.

 

[Sky King]

I think we're ok though if we only had to replace 1 at time. And I think a quality tackle would be more difficult to come by than pretty much any position except QB. If they can find one, great, but most teams don't have 2, let alone guys to trade away. And if they do, what are we going to invest in one? what is acceptable to invest in another LT should BahkT go down and you don't like Spriggs? It certainly doesn't look like BahkT is a long term deal, though he could be, how much more do we invest? How much more do you invest at RT? should we invest more at RT for a back up again, when though a tad shaky to start, was filled adequately by Murphy against a stout front? I'm confident this team can win with a guy missing on the line, we just did and against one of the best Dlines in the league.

You know as well as I do, and every other person that watches and pays attention knows, adequate tackles are not just sitting around. So, with that in mind, are we trading for someone? which one? RT or LT? both? anyone that thinks that is out of their ******* minds to say the least and that was me being nice

I'm not thrilled with Pankey either, but anybody thinking we should have a BahkT and Bulaga backing up BahkT and Bulaga well, let's just say you need a class or 2 in expectation management.

There's a whole lot of in-between from Bakhtiari/Bulaga to Murphy/Pankey. Maybe not Murphy so much now that he's started a whole game against a very worthy opponent and was serviceable doing so. Good on him. But Pankey has zero experience and he's a project, at best. Spriggs has been behind the performance-curve all along and he'll be staying there until his hammy is fully-healed and his game improves. He's been struggling and we've witnessed nothing solid to indicate that his woes will end anytime soon.

It seems mighty hard to believe that there was not one veteran option available out there this Summer who wouldn't have been better in a backup role than a completely inexperienced unknown such as Pankey or any of the other UDFAs the Packers brought to camp. Not even one? Every single one of them out of the 1,200 players cut at the end of camp can't all have been worse options than Pankey. Maybe he'll be the second coming of Bakhtiari someday. I hope he is. Then again, he could be the next coming of Marshall Newhouse. But how long will it take to know what his true ceiling may be? Surely even the most die-hard Pollyanna would not expect it to be revealed as early as this Sunday night.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm not thrilled with Pankey either, but anybody thinking we should have a BahkT and Bulaga backing up BahkT and Bulaga well, let's just say you need a class or 2 in expectation management.

There is a WIDE margin between the abilities of Pankey and Bahk. I for one have acknowledged this point several times, the Packers are not going to be able to go out and find someone at the same level as Bahk to back him up. You keep bringing that up as a catch all of "you posters are crazy if you think we can have 4 Pro Bowl Tackles. When has someone suggested that? Looking for quality backups makes you assume that? I for one have never suggested that. So if your "expectation management" skills tell you that "well......that's it...we just may have to move forward with an UDFA we cut from the team 2 weeks ago, because nothing better is out there, then you might want to enroll in that class you speak about. If AR and Hundley go down, you think the Packers should just hand the keys to the cadillac over to Callahan?

I already know what your next point will be......you will ask me "who do they sign?". First, I would leave that up to professional scouts and the Packer staff that make those decisions. Second, if you think there is nobody better than Pankey out there, nobody I suggest will change your mind. If I thought the Packers were even looking, it would be a worthwhile discussion, but again, it appears that TT thinks the answers lie within his own roster of inexperienced development guys like Pankey. Just like the CB position last year, it also appears TT will be moving forward with that strategy.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There's a whole lot of in-between from Bakhtiari/Bulaga to Murphy/Pankey. Maybe not Murphy so much now that he's started a whole game against a very worthy opponent and was serviceable doing so. Good on him. But Pankey has zero experience and he's a project, at best. Spriggs has been behind the performance-curve all along and he'll be staying there until his hammy is fully-healed and his game improves. He's been struggling and we've witnessed nothing solid to indicate that his woes will end anytime soon.

It seems mighty hard to believe that there was not one veteran option available out there this Summer who wouldn't have been better in a backup role than a completely inexperienced unknown such as Pankey or any of the other UDFAs the Packers brought to camp. Not even one? Every single one of them out of the 1,200 players cut at the end of camp can't all have been worse options than Pankey. Maybe he'll be the second coming of Bakhtiari someday. I hope he is. Then again, he could be the next coming of Marshall Newhouse. But how long will it take to know what his true ceiling may be? Surely even the most die-hard Pollyanna would not expect it to be revealed as early as this Sunday night.

Dude....THAT is scary.....were you looking over my shoulder? LOL

 

[Sky King]

Dude....THAT is scary.....were you looking over my shoulder? LOL

Nope. Just calling it as I see it. BTW, have you submitted your DNA for testing yet, s-s-s-son?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Nope. Just calling it as I see it. BTW, have you submitted your DNA for testing yet, s-s-s-son?

True, on calling it as you see it. I hope we are both wrong and everyone of the backups that play this year are future hall of famers. But as you pointed out and I was implying......there has to be better options available.

BTW.... my son Adam Pankey might be starting on Sunday!

 

[Sky King]

True, on calling it as you see it. I hope we are both wrong and everyone of the backups that play this year are future hall of famers. But as you pointed out and I was implying......there has to be better options available.

BTW.... my son Adam Pankey might be starting on Sunday!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[swhitset]

I think we're ok though if we only had to replace 1 at time. And I think a quality tackle would be more difficult to come by than pretty much any position except QB. If they can find one, great, but most teams don't have 2, let alone guys to trade away. And if they do, what are we going to invest in one? what is acceptable to invest in another LT should BahkT go down and you don't like Spriggs? It certainly doesn't look like BahkT is a long term deal, though he could be, how much more do we invest? How much more do you invest at RT? should we invest more at RT for a back up again, when though a tad shaky to start, was filled adequately by Murphy against a stout front? I'm confident this team can win with a guy missing on the line, we just did and against one of the best Dlines in the league.

You know as well as I do, and every other person that watches and pays attention knows, adequate tackles are not just sitting around. So, with that in mind, are we trading for someone? which one? RT or LT? both? anyone that thinks that is out of their ******* minds to say the least and that was me being nice

I'm not thrilled with Pankey either, but anybody thinking we should have a BahkT and Bulaga backing up BahkT and Bulaga well, let's just say you need a class or 2 in expectation management.

While Spriggs has not, at this point, lived up to his draft cost, I distinctly remember many in here calling Ted an idiot for investing so much in a backup tackle... The arguments didn't seem to have much to do with his potential, but rather, they were mostly centered around the fact that the offensive line depth was fine and Investing 3 draft picks on him was a waste. Now I'm going to assume that the Packers front office had a much better idea just who they intended to retain and who they did not. So.... I'm going to say that the fact that Spriggs has not developed as quickly as one would hope is the actual issue here... not Ted's prescience in drafting/ bringing in more linemen.
. Now all that being said... that was then...this is now. At this point, I seriously hope Ted is is exploring every option out there because it would seem to be an extreme waste to risk Rodgers' health after all the extra moves he made in the offseason to improve the offense and the defense.

 

[ExpatPacker]

While Spriggs has not, at this point, lived up to his draft cost, I distinctly remember many in here calling Ted an idiot for investing so much in a backup tackle... The arguments didn't seem to have much to do with his potential, but rather, they were mostly centered around the fact that the offensive line depth was fine and Investing 3 draft picks on him was a waste. Now I'm going to assume that the Packers front office had a much better idea just who they intended to retain and who they did not. So.... I'm going to say that the fact that Spriggs has not developed as quickly as one would hope is the actual issue here... not Ted's prescience in drafting/ bringing in more linemen.
. Now all that being said... that was then...this is now. At this point, I seriously hope Ted is is exploring every option out there because it would seem to be an extreme waste to risk Rodgers' health after all the extra moves he made in the offseason to improve the offense and the defense.

Well there are a couple of issues in addition to Spriggs' lack of development so far. JC Tretter's development into a legit starter meant that Ted would have been hard pressed to re-sign him. Tretter could play any position on the OL and was comfortable at OT. He was the Packers' best backup by far. It was a real pity to lose him, but hey, he was too good.

It was just bad luck that Spriggs came down with a hammy injury the same week that Bulaga and Bahk are injured. There was nothing wrong with Spriggs' health up until this week. Having Murphy and Spriggs as your backups isn't so bad, i agree on that. It may have to be patchwork for 1 week, but hopefully only for 1 week.

And let's hope MM & co adjusts their gameplan and Rodgers doesn't hang on to the damn ball too long if both starting tackles are out.

 

[Dblbogey]

is there any way we could invite the falcons to our damn practice? the way packers get injured during practice is a concern now. hell, now we have to be on edge during a whole week of practice wondering who will get hurt during that week.

I've wondered what the percentages are of injuries sustained in games and injuries in practice. You have to wonder if, at least your key veteran players, shouldn't just be held out one practice a week. Reduce the odds of injury, help keep them fresher, help develop backups. It's genius, I tell ya.

 

[Dblbogey]

I figure the Packers offensive line will be the culprit that derails Rodgers march through Atlanta.
Hopefully Rodgers comes out of this game alive and well.
The offensive line will likely be a problem all season.
Every year it seems to be one position or another that derails our season.
Being this injured along the OL two weeks into the season doesn't bode well for this group.

If Bakhtieri is healthy enough to be his usual self, I think we are all good. Murphy seems adequate as a fill in for Bulaga, who seems to be at least 2 weeks away.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yeah. It would obviously be nice to win the game, but my chess head says it's more important to keep AR vertical.

If both cannot go, I can't help but think we'll be seeing some more 12 personnel in this game, and in our spread packages providing help to at least Aaron's left. That way, at least his blindside is covered.

That, or go empty and nickel and dime it down the field. Get the ball out on 3 step drops as much as possible.

Either way, if both aren't able to go, I'll be interested to see how creative McCarthy gets with his personnel groupings and his play calling.

If both Bakhtiari and Bulaga are out for Sunday's game it might be best to promote Callahan from the practice squad and start him.

Injuries I can "forgive", those are a part of football and hard to predict. What I was trying to wrap my head around almost 2 weeks ago and even more so today, is the lack of experience the Packers decided to start the season with in regards to OL depth. The only 2 guys with much of any experience were Spriggs and Barclay. Barclay's injury status was known before the cutdowns, as was Sprigg's slow development.

If Bulaga and Bahk can't go and Rodgers gets "blown up" on Sunday, this one is on TT for once again thinking he can build a solid roster with UDFA's and late round picks being forced to start when they aren't ready.

Actually there was reason to be concerned about the depth on the offensive line after the Packers mostly decided to ignore the position during the draft.

how about we start of list of teams with 4 quality starters at tackle and then go from there.

How about you coming up with a list of teams that enter week 2 of the season with their starting left tackle being questionable and not having a healthy backup who has taken a single snap (including preseason) at the position???

I agree it's completely unrealistic to expect having four quality starting tackles on the roster but there's no doubt there's a way to do better than Adam Pankey possibly protecting Rodgers' blind side.

While Spriggs has not, at this point, lived up to his draft cost, I distinctly remember many in here calling Ted an idiot for investing so much in a backup tackle... The arguments didn't seem to have much to do with his potential, but rather, they were mostly centered around the fact that the offensive line depth was fine and Investing 3 draft picks on him was a waste. Now I'm going to assume that the Packers front office had a much better idea just who they intended to retain and who they did not. So.... I'm going to say that the fact that Spriggs has not developed as quickly as one would hope is the actual issue here... not Ted's prescience in drafting/ bringing in more linemen.

While a lot of Packers fans were absolutely fine with Thompson drafting an offensive lineman early in the 2016 draft there was valid criticism of him using three picks to select a backup though.

It was just bad luck that Spriggs came down with a hammy injury the same week that Bulaga and Bahk are injured. There was nothing wrong with Spriggs' health up until this week. Having Murphy and Spriggs as your backups isn't so bad, i agree on that. It may have to be patchwork for 1 week, but hopefully only for 1 week.

While there wasn't anything wrong with Spriggs' health entering this week there for sure was with his play. I wouldn't feel comfortable with him protecting the franchise by aby means.

BTW while it might have to be a patchwork offensive line for only a week it takes only one glaring mistake and an unfortunate hit to completely derail the team's season.

 

[Brian Purdy]

I'm smelling a rat and I hope I'm wrong.
Packers started with beating Seattle to start the season and healthy aside from Bulaga being out. Bulaga has the flu, now Daniels and Bahktiari are questionable for Atlanta. McCarthy suddenly has a scapegoat for losing.
Daniels provided inside pressure that caused the fumble that sparked the Montgomery touchdown.
Bulaga is sick, I get that but they do have a training staff who could work on Bahktiari's hamstrings.
With the next game against a struggling Bengals, they could start out 3-0. Be in control of their own destiny. The same intensity better be there Sunday night and no lackluster performance.
If the two tackles are out, then Rodgers can't afford to hold onto the ball. No ab-lib. 3 step drop, ball out, 5 step drop, ball out or he will get sacked a lot and the Pack will lose.
I expect a 3-0 beginning to the season!

 

[Sky King]

If both Bakhtiari and Bulaga are out for Sunday's game it might be best to promote Callahan from the practice squad and start him.

Now that's a move I can support.