this year's oline is what we get for ignoring needs on the oline for several years. it was barbre's first start so i can forgive that, but collegde? this is what, his 4th year now and he just gets dominated by titans' leftovers? we have no depth at all at tackle. we spend late round draft picks to get linemen and how does that work for us? below average offensive lines for years and years. at least in the past they could pass protect, now we can't do anything. 2010 draft we NEED to get an OT 1st of 2nd round and get another lineman (OT preferably) a few rounds later. this is getting rediculous. rodgers is gonna be dead at the end of the season if he keeps getting sacked and taking the shots he has been taking.

The offensive line has not been ignored. We've drated a couple o-linemen every year. The problem is that TT is apparently an incompetent judge of offensive line talent.

I have to fully agree.

In defense of the OL; they're blocking for a RB who couldn't secure the starting position in college, and a QB who thinks that he can hold onto the ball for five or six seconds at a time.

I've said it before and will say it again; you build from the ground up. Offensive and defensive lines first. We need to pick up some offensive line help (veterans) now about 2 will do at tackle. Draft big nasty offensive linemen 325 plus. Forget the zone blocking scheme. On defense they just ran the ball on us. Aaron Rogers stated in an interview the last two weeks we need to practice like professionals. That I thought was an interesting statement. But, I still think we need to start looking at rebuilding our offensive line.

There is no defense of the oline, they are just not getting it done, weak on protection and no push in the running game.

I am at a loss regarding the OL. We draft athletic guys to play the ZBS, but they can't run block worth a crap. So we draft a little bigger guys and they can't run block or pass block.

I was not a big MS fan near the end, but I loved his OLines. Ours are bad and have ZERO identity. You cannot control the trenches with Finesse and right now I see way too much finesse.

Or that Ted is judging talent OK, but McCarthy and Campen can't teach for crap. Somewhere along the line something is getting majorly screwed up with these guys.

Via the draft no, via FA's yes. All holes cannot be plugged in the draft and you cannot expect a 5th or 6th round pick to step in and be productive from day 1.

Well in my defense, that has nothing to do with the offensive line specifically - that's just Ted's modus operandi when it comes to team building in general. Everything is through the draft.

Also, at some point the ZBS needs to be scrapped. The big strength of the ZBS is supposed to be the run game. Well, in the last four years:

2006: 1663 yards on 431 carries (3.9 yard average). 23rd in the league.

2007: 1597 yards on 388 carries (4.1 yard average). 21st in the league.

2008: 17th in the league. 1805 yards on 437 carries (4.1 yard average). But if you take Rodgers out of the equation, 1598 yards on 381 carries (4.2 yard average) - good for 27th in the league.

2009: 22nd in the league. 165 yards on 41 carries (4.1 yard average). Take Rodgers out of the equation, it's
115 yards on 33 carries for (3.5 yard average)- which would be good for 29th in the league.

The four years before that?

2005: 30th
2004: 10th
2003: 3rd
2002: 12th

If the run game does not rebound this year, the ZBS absolutely must be scrapped. It's four straight years of utter failure.

My question is it due to scheme or talent?

its the talent; just look at the broncos. they didnt (under shanahan) even need a good RB to slash defenses with a zone game. our zone blocking scheme might be different, i dont know, but our oline needs some improvements (LT cuz cliffy is old and have no depth here, LG because colledge has been sucking for years, i'll wait longer to see about sitton and i guess barbre as well even though i have been hating on him since he got schooled in week 1)

Not really. He just ignores it. He drafts plenty of OL but he drafts them later in the draft. Drafting OL early is the safest thing you can do. He chooses to draft skills position players early in the draft. If you want good OL you have to draft them before other teams do. Its as simple as that. We can't keep drafting WRs and LBs in the 1st and 2nd rounds every year. At some point you have to draft a stud OT in the 1st round to anchor your line around. The way to build a team is to find your franchsise QB then draft a stud LT to protect his backside and build the line around that. Everything else is of secondary importance. The Packers might have the most talented skills position players in the entire NFL as a whole but they just don't look good because the Packers lose the battle in the trenches on a consistent basis. A great QB and WR group doesn't do any good if the QB spends half the game on his back or running for his life. A good secondary and LB group doesn't do any good, if the team gets mauled by the run. Thompson has either ignored the OL and DL or has missed badly on the early picks he has invested on either line. Umm Harrell . These two games to me are really shocking. I really was drinking the Koolaid. I thought their offense could be no worse than last year and with a better defense this team could make some noise. The OL wasn't great last year but it was servicable for the most part. Sure Rodgers probably took more hits and sacks than he should have last year but it wasn't anything like we've seen so far this year. The OL looks like garbage this year. Complete garbage. I'm more disappointed right now than I was at any point last year. Like some others, MM and TT have lost me. We shouldn't get spanked on our home turf by a team like the Bengals. I didn't really underestimate the Bengals. They were a very competitive team last year with a good defense but we have to beat teams like that at Lambeau Field. We need to beat teams when we are favored by almost a double-digit point margin. We just have to. Our first 3 games were supposed to be a cakewalk that allowed us to fine-tune our defense when the bigger tests came later in the year. I'm not liking what I'm seeing. Yesterday's performance was just plain offensive. Absolutely terrible.

Neither. The players GB has can play, IMO. The coaching is absolutely horrible. These guys are not low end picks... 2nd, 3rd and 4th.. Rivera was a 6th, I thinks, Flanigan was a 3rd???, Tauscher was a 7th, Clifton was a 2nd.....

The players can play. It has been the overworked scheme/coaching. They need to scrap it, but you cannot do it during the season. All these guys seem to do is think about what they are to do. In thinking, they are slow to react and not instinctive. If this means dummy it down, then so be it. They can't execute this crap...

Denver did not have world beaters on the OL either, if I remember correctly. They were good players that worked as a team. Damn you Jagz.. they should have scrapped it when you left...

"In defense of the OL" was the wrong choice of words on my part. That unit clearly sucks. The point is, that Rodgers has a sack rate of 13% after two weeks. Obviously, this is a very limited sample size, but that number is so mind-blowing that we'd have to be complete idiots to think that even an above-average OL would correct the problem.

Rodgers is a guy who takes a lot of sacks. As he improves his pre-snap reads, this should improve (assuming he doesn't suffer a serious injury before that happens).

Agree. None of them are playing even average. Taking 10 sacks in 2 games is serious cause for alarm. Especially when the running game is suffering as well.

As it was pointed out earlier, Rodgers can't throw when he is laying on his back.

Now that is funny!

As you indicate, it's too early to make that judgement. Last year the Packers gave up sacks on 6.0% of dropbacks, which was slightly better than average (ranked 14th). Consider that they were playing from behind a lot, and that's not a figure to be concerned about.

This season, so far, is different. Especially as the Pack is playing lots of max-protect. Possible explanations:

— Odom and Ogunleye are on fire, and the Packers have been unfortunate to draw them in weeks one and two;
— Rodgers is losing confidence in his line;
— Rodgers is gaining confidence in his own ability to hang onto the ball longer in order to make downfield plays, à la Favre;
— With extra blockers in, there are fewer receiving options, especially on short routes, leading to coverage sacks;
— The switch from Wells to Spitz at center has led to problems reading and communicating defensive fronts;
— The line has gotten worse at pass blocking in the offseason.

Its especially frustrating when we knew last year there was little to no depth at OT on this team and TT drafts a #4 WR with our first pick and a #3 QB with our 2nd pick!

Good point. I like Jordy Nelson and think he will be a good player (I don't know why we don't use him in the Wildcat.)
But we could have had him later I think. I wanted us to get the safety Phillips that year on our first pick. This guy is starting now for the Giants and playing well.

Then take an OL.

Oh well, maybe TT knew better.

Except so far, it hasn't shown up on the field.

Yes. This was the cause of a lot of frustration. IMO.

I find myself in complete agreement with 'heavyD & da Pack'. We have had plenty of guys drafted. a number of the picks have been more projects than finished product type guys, which allows you to get more talented guys at lower draft positions. I don't have a problem with that as long as we have that time. We have run out of time at LT.
When the 2010 draft rolls around the OT situation must be addressed. We need a LT who can go in his first season.

The sheer number of guys who have failed to step up says loudly to me (as it does to heavyD) that scheme and coaching are the culprits. If it were bad drafting, then at least SOME of the guys we have brought in would have stepped up their play by now. James Campen has taught the O line nothing in three years. They still cannot even get their fundamentals right.

No argument form me on Nelson (who I do like but you are right, it's about priorities). However; I believe Brohm was drafted to be the #2 QB and at the time it was definitely a need pick. According to most experts and most posters here, it was the steal of the second round. He has obviously not lived up to his draft status and who knows if he ever will. At the time of that pick, back-up QB was at least as big of an issue as back-up Tackle was.

As for the offensive line. 5 years is long enough and if this situation does kill a very promising season, IMO it won't matter whether it is coaching or talent - I think management, coaches and players should be held accountable. Hopefully it won't come to that and these guys can get their act together.

I dont have an issue with drafting a QB but not at #2 when you invested time and money to develop Rodgers and clearly he was the franchise QB of the future. The guys you pick at #2 need to contribute for 16 games on the field not hold clipboards for 16 weeks

Exactly. Thats why picking up a veteran QB to help your young starter would have been ideal. Those #1 and #2 picks should have been used elsewhere.

At the time there were LOTS of concerns about Rodger's ability to stay healthy and that position was a very important back-up spot. IIRC, the general feeling was that the Packers were set at every starting spot and the big question mark was at QB. It was probably the most important back-up on the team, so I didn't have a problem with using a #2 to fill that spot. IMO, the problem with the pick is that Brohm hasn't panned out, not that Thompson used a #2 on a QB.



A veteran would have been my preference as well but I didn't have a problem with choosing Brohm either. I thought they got a huge steal, looks like I was really wrong.

I get what you are saying about needing backup but you are then expecting a rookie to the "next guy in" at a positon that takes 2-3 years to learn. Again to draft a guy at #2 who chances are will hold a clipboard to 16 weeks is a major reach ...... there were other positons that needed to be addressed from a depth perspective. Guys you draft on day one are players you can count on to contribute for 16 weeks ON the field.

So, by this logic we shouldn't have drafted Aaron Rodgers and picked up a Vet backup QB instead. Aaron was picked KNOWING he was going to sit behind Favre for at least 1 or more years. If every backup on the team is not a rookie, you will have no room on your team for future players.

I completely agree about preferring a veteran over a rookie and that would have been my preference. I do not think it was a good idea to have a rookie as our back-up last year but if you are going to do that - I can see why you would spend a high pick to get that guy.

What is so frustrating to me about that draft is that Nelson was really the luxury pick and if you want to talk about need, he was really the guy you should have passed on. Unfortunately he is the only second round pick that you are getting anything from, so it is kind of hard to complain about him. The killer is the zero production from Lee & Brohm.

Like I've said before - I like Thompson and IMO he's done a pretty good job but it is very difficult to defend the way he has built the o-line. If they are not able to turn this around, I don't see how you can place the blame anywhere but on Thompson & McCarthy.