OK, I'm a new poster, and none of you know much about me. I'll tell you straight up, I'm a longtime fan but nowhere near as knowledgeable as a number of you people are. I can hold my own in most discussions, but there are a lot of posters here that I'm just nowhere near on the same level. Especially when it comes to issues relating to the offensive line.

So for those of you who do know this game so much better than I do, my question is - if this offensive line is basically the same line as last year's, what the heck happened? Granted, it wasn't exactly the Great Wall of China last year either, but still - if I recall correctly, they allowed 30-some sacks last year, and after only 2 games they've already given up a third that many. What happened? What is it about their play this year that's seemingly so much worse than last year? What am I not seeing here? Did Clifton really lose that much in just a few months? Were they a mediocre line with key vulnerabilities that have just now become exposed? Is it bad coaching?

Is it pad level?

Seriously, what happened here? How did the wheels come off? Anyone have an educated guess?

The make-up of the line is very different from last year's. Sunday in St Louis, there will only be one starter lining up in the same position as last year: Scott Wells at center. (You know, the guy who lost his job in the offseason.) For the rest, Sitton has four starts at RG, Barbre has two at RT, Spitz has I think five at LG, and Colledge just one at LT. That's a dozen in total.

The most important factor in line performance is stability. Lines play as a unit. It's difficult to do that when the guy who usually plays outside you now plays inside you.

The Packers had returned the same personnel on the line for three years until the end of 2008. In the offseason, McCarthy decided to blow up the unit. Weaknesses in the running game led him to believe the line needed more power up front: hence the new right-half of the line (and demotion for Wells). The previous starters, Tauscher and Spitz, were good against the pass last year, rotten in the running game.

But the left half needed attention too, especially in pass protection. Clifton gave up more sacks last year than in any season since 2001. Colledge gave up more sacks than any other left guard in the nation apart from Alan Faneca. Rodgers, who has been criticized for holding onto the ball too long, made the line look better than it was by rolling out of the pocket more often than any other starting quarterback in the league. He was also very effective throwing on the run (and scrambling).

This year, Rodgers is staying in the pocket more. (A good idea in the long run, for health and safety reasons.) Half of the sacks he has taken came when Colledge and Barbre whiffed one-to-one on a pass rusher — McCarthy absolutely has to adjust the protection more quickly when one of his linemen is getting beat. There were communication problems in identifying blitzes when Spitz was playing center. And the running game is sadly reminiscent of last year's: slow-developing stretches and holes not being where they should be for Grant to cut through.

So, in answer to your question: inexperienced personnel; individual errors; schematic mismatches; insipid play-calling; lack of adjustment; and opponents who boast good pass rushers and effective schemes.

with the mediochre talent we have along the line, a shuffle like this is disasterous. I'm no TT hater but having no backup options at S and LT is all on him.

I agree the LT backup (or lack thereof) is a big TT issue.

But, I fail to see the Safety issue as TT's fault. We lost both our interchangeable (position-wise, not talent-wise) starting safeties and the top backup to injuries in the first 2 weeks. So, just because TT cut a backup who was inexplicably popular after training camp does not make us have 'no backup options' at safety.

Pad-level... Fundamentals... Mental Errors... I think I'm joking

I think TT got too cute with some of his picks. Tony Moll played mostly tight end in college - Barbre played Division 2 or 3 or whatever. These are major projects. Four year starters from Michigan need a transition period before becoming viable options and we are messing around with guys that just take far too long to find out if they are even viable. Look how much time and effort and coaching went into Moll and in the end you basically cut the guy. The guys we have been grooming were horrible and havent got much better.

Wahle and Rivera are gone - now Tauscher is gone - Clifton is on his last legs and all we got is Colledge who may or may not be able to play LT. Wolf could find a OG in a crowd at Wal-Mart and we are laboring years to find decent OL candidates. Its been a peeve of mine and in the end could cause TT demise

I put the Safety position on TT not because of anthony smith. We have two capable starters in Collins and Bigby. Both with injury histories. I believe TT has known for some time (coaching staff has) that Rouse is just not getting it. Yet he was kept for reasons we don't know. Then he inexplicably matches the offer on Bush and no one can explain that one away. Last minute he brings in a backup that was cut from the Ravens. So basically he went into the season with 2 legit safeties, a special teams player, a guy who can't cover and a relative unknown from the ravens. And now Bigby and Collins are dinged. So at S we have the same situation we have at LT. Lets pray a DE doesn't go down because that spot is thin too.

I think it has more to do with the playcalling. I think Aaron Rodgers is right in wanting fewer people blocking back there but more passing options. Favre and Rodgers have excelled at making the defense pay for sending blitzers. Now McCarthy is calling plays with 7man protections. That really limits the passing options. The strength of this offense is the talent and depth at the WR position. We aren't utilizing that by having all kinds of guys staying in to block. McCarthy doesn't know the strength of his team and players anymore. Rodgers is among the best in the business throwing against the blitz. Why keep twice as many guys into block when your QB is an expert at taking advantage of mismatches left by blitzing defenders? This is on MM and TT. Thompson has drafted OL that can't win individual matchups. McCarthy isn't calling the plays that maximize the strengths of the offense. I've never seen McCarthy call a game like the one against the Bengals. The only passing options were down the field. We have extra guys blocking but they have to protect longer because there are few short and intermediate passing options. I don't know what McCarthy is thinking anymore. He wants to beat teams by throwing the deep ball. You have to set up the deep ball. Rodgers feels he would fare better with less blockers and more guys running routes down the field. There are few defenses that could cover our WR/TE group. Dare them to blitz. When you look at the Packers offense in recent years the big plays have come off of playaction and blitzes. What the heck is McCarthy doing calling for so much protection. Added protection doesn't help if all the routes are deep routes that take time to develop. He literally ties Aaron Rodgers' hands behind his back. He gave him few passing options against the Bengals.

Yeah the moves at Safety so far have been completely idiotic. I said on this board at the time that cutting Smith was a dumb move. I am getting frustrated seeing players get cut every season only to have Bush still on the roster. I think Thompson is starting to fall in love with players potential. This is the NFL not MLB. We dont' have a farm system to develop players. The guys that we decide to keep on the 53 man rosters have to be players. Not guys with potential. Every year we cut proven players and keep guys with potential. We are seeing the results now. I could understand most of the rookies making the roster early in Thompson's tenure but how do all but one of the 2009 draft picks make the roster in the 5th year of Thompson's tenure? That is inexplicable. Nearly every single draft pick is making the roster every year. That is a huge problem. There are two explanations and neither bode well for this team. Either this team just isn't that good and needs to have an infusion of 8,9,10 rookies every year or Thompson is in love with potential and favors it over proven production.

Another silly move is keeping 3 FBs. I really would have liked to see Sutton make the roster. At this point we could have used an extra body running the ball. Our running game has been pathetic. I really can't believe we have as many FBs on the roster as RBs. That is just plain silly. It all came down to Quinn Johnson. He isn't a player yet but they couldn't let him go. In that case choose either Kuhn or Hall and keep Johnson. We don't need this many FBs for crying out loud. Again Thompson is too in love with potential. This is year 5 of his tenure. Its time for results. He can't spend his entire tenure building for the future. The window is closing rapidly.

Versus the Bears the problem was Barbre. By the 2nd half he had his head back on straight and played well enough to keep Rodgers up-rigth.

Versus the Bengals... I think the team expected less than what they got (as did many fans). The other thing about the Bengals is they were able to move on the D which was somewhat of a surprise. The OLine was not alone in regards to the blocking problems against CIN, the Backs and TEs missed blocks too.

As for the LT back-up... the approach McCarthy and Thompson have taken is not unique. Most teams carry 8 or 9 OL. When someone gets injured it is not uncommon for the remaing 4 starters to shuffle rather than someone just coming in for the injured position.

He was also getting chip help for the TE's

My memory is foggy, but I think the last two games are reminiscent of 2006. When Spitz and Colledge were rookies, and Moll started a lot too. They couldn't block, so the running game didn't work, extra guys were had to block to help them protect (and the protection still wasn't that great), and with so many guys protecting here weren't many open targets.



It's too bad that we don't have some kind of developmental system like the minor leagues. Heh, a 60-man practice squad and you could send guys there without being afraid that some other team would snag them.

I agree that it's a real roster problem. For years we've been having guys like Coston and Barbre and Geno on the roster, but no way the coach was actually going to want to play them in a close meaningful game. Finley last year, and Lee and Brohm as well as Geno. This year we've got Underwood, and Jones, and Wynn. Lang was supposedly experienced and smart and looked good and everybody liked him... in OTA's. But now that it's game time and Barbre got killed, Lang was nowhere in the scene for RT. And with Lang supposedly practicing mostly behind Colledge, the minute that Colledge moves again it isn't Lang, it's the Spitz shuffle.

I don't know what the solution is. It's a win-now league with no farm system but where injuries are prolific. So somebody who's at the back of your roster, he might be in position to start in no time. (The #4-5 safeties, for example.)

Guys, Anthony Smith was cut because he refused to play special teams. He didn't accept his role given by the coaching staff, so they let him go. I guarantee Rouse would've been cut if Smith was kept.

And the OL troubles aren't just this year, they're last year.

Even though a lot of the guys now were on the 2007 squad, there were 2 big differences, Clifton and Tauscher. Both were still putting out on a high level and in turn, helped improve those young guys.

In 2008, even though both were still here, both were banged up and both weren't as effective as before. So when Colledge had to step up into a bigger role, he failed. Colledge was hyped up to be a legit NFL starter and maybe that was what led people to become sort of blind to his abilities as an OL. But he was very inconsistent in 2008 and he only had a few good games. Same goes with Jason Spitz. He played the same as Colledge. Inconsistent. Few good games.

This showed. Rodgers, a scrambling QB, still got sacked twice as much as Favre last year. The running game faltered and there were no holes to run through.

Same thing is happening in 2009. We've got less, reliable OL. All the weight is on the young guys' shoulders to be effective. Colledge and Spitz are our best OL, but they're below average starting lineman. It doesn't matter if you put these guys on the Giants they're backups. And if you even put these guys on the Steelers, they're backups.

When it comes to the argument Rodgers holds onto the ball to long, that's a joke.

I can't remember to much from last year, but I do know that Rodgers barely had any time to throw the ball. And from the 2 games I've reviewed this year, there's hardly been any snaps where Rodgers is given 4 seconds to throw the ball. And that's the golden rule. Give your QB 4 seconds. 1 second to drop back and receivers to begin their routes. 2 and 3 seconds for receivers to run their routes and the QB progress through his targets. And 4 seconds to pass the ball.

You want to really know how long this OL can protect Rodgers through the first couple of games? TWO SECONDS!

He can barely look at his receivers before he has guys in his face.

That's why this Sunday is the perfect time for McCarthy to start running some new plays. I'm talking about installing timing routes into this offense. That's what we ran in the preseason and that's why our OL looked good.

3-step drops. Quick 5-10 yard routes. Get the ball out.

This OL will NOT get better this year. Timed passing plays would make our offense look like the preseason because that's what we did in the preseason.

Hard to do when teams are dropping LB's into coverage when they know they can get pressue from the front 4. They are taking away the routs. The one way to cure that is to run the ball and move the LB's and S up

That's a great point, Strat.

I've wondered that myself. Meanwhile, it seems that because they make the team, that people think that these players are somehow good and, "quality starters."

Well, the Rams, Raiders, Browns and Lions then I guess have quality starters, too. Scary to think about.

You're not going to get pressure from the front 4 when you keep completing quick, 5-yard passes. It won't matter if they're keeping guys back for coverage when we've got one of the best receiving groups in the NFL. Packers can go 4 or 5 wide and get manned up on defenders.

We've got away from that type of offense. That fast tempo, pure west coast-styled offense. That's the type of offense that got us to the NFC championship. Once you come out firing these quick passes, the opposing defense will give you more respect and in turn will open up running lanes and deep balls. But those quick passes need to be the bread and butter of this offense this year. Or our offense will struggle. That's the only way to get by with this OL.

Or go with a shotgun spread and force the D to spread out and take advantage of the one on one situations that will be created so we can actually get off some quick hitters and maybe get a little "tempo" to our offense.

Answer: They're not actually this bad.

The O-line is facing adversity both in Babre's tough first start and with Clifton being out and forcing our best o-line starter into a position he hadn't practiced at this season. But this is through two games -- the truth be told (and as I believe it will pan out), they're not this bad.

Not just quality starters but quality depth

They were not steller last year, Rodgers was sacked 34 times last year and its basically the same group. They have not been good last year or this year

In Shadow's defense, I don't think they're, THAT bad -- like, giving up 5 sacks every single game bad. But, they're not very good, either. It's time to start putting some high draft picks and money at real deal offensive linemen... not diamonds in the 5th round rough and certainly not other teams' rejects. We need studs.

There's a significant difference between not being so hot and making the opposing DEs look like pro-bowlers, however.

Exactly....thanks.

I ask this, would GB OL guys start on most other teams around the league?

ammek pretty much nailed it.

This Packer line has a lot of potential, and I really like the starting line-up of Clifton--Colledge--Spitz--Sitton--Barbre, but they lack the cohesiveness and experience that comes with playing together. I'd hope they'd develop some of that this year, but with Clifton already hurt, the musical chairs has begun again.

But let's remember that this line is capable: after all, Rodgers wasn't sacked the entire pre-season.

The first two weeks have been a perfect storm of sorts. They'll improve.

Clifton gone for the next 2 games......

Who is going to block Jared Allen?

Is Chris Long going to be a big worry?

DP!

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/articl...1/90918147/1058

While there is a correlation, drafting in the first round does not assure sucess. I just found it an interesting article.

We managed to make two average guys on Cincy and Chicago look like Pro Bowlers.

What will happen when we face the Vikings and Jared Allen who is a Pro Bowler already?

I shudder to think how much help Colledge is going to need.

This 2008 sacks stat keeps reappearing as a knock on the line and Rodgers. Let's set it straight. The Pack (ie, Rodgers) did indeed give up 34 sacks. A dozen teams gave up more. But Green Bay was ninth in attempts. Dividing sacks by QB dropbacks, Rodgers was sacked on 6.0% of passing plays. The NFL average is 6.2%. The Packers' line was slightly better than average at pass protection last year (it ranked 14th).

So what?

So we sacrifice the safety position for the sake of special teams? We're already sacrificing the possibility of solidifying other positions by keeping extra fullbacks. We might have sacrificed a bit of the strength of the WR corps for special teams (that's harder to say - as a WR, perhaps the line between Swain and Martin was very thin, if there at all).

The Packers do all this, but don't put Nelson back there to return kickoffs, though he's clearly shown himself to be better at it? They do this to position strength, but when a whole slew of the best and the brightest were brought in for the defensive coaching, what do the Packers do about special teams coaching? Promote an asst. with very limited experience to the job.

But let's cut Smith because he doesn't want to play special teams. Right.

Smith was cut cuz he wasn't assignment sure and made 3 mistakes for every good play he made in TC. If he was so wonderful why is he now the 3rd stringer on one of the worst passing defenses in the league?

The guy had some concerning attitude problems. He was released by the Steelers for the same reasons. I'm pretty sure special teams wasn't the only thing but it was most likely the tipping point because I've read multiple reports he was cut because he refused to accept his role.

Because he's awesome and he's the answer to all our woes.

This thread is about the O-line not smith.
When this O-line ever get so bad is the question, the question is when has an O-line ever been good under TT? Answer: never! It wasn't good last year, it was better because Tauscher was a better pass blocker last year, he is gone. 2007 it was mostly quick slants with lots of RAC yardage, Grant did reasonably well. I attribute Grants success to the passing games success. We had a veteran strong arm QB who was a gunslinger, M3 didn't reign him in he worked what he was given . Why did we abandon the quick slants? The coach who is the best QB coach since the forward pass was invented, feels that is not ARs strength. So we sit with a lousy line for four years now and a coach who wants throw deep. When will the O-line get better when TT and M3 are fired after this season.

Tauscher was not good last year. The OL is not the problem, IMO. It is the scheme or lack of commitment or poor coaching. Anyway, it is the coaching. The players GB has are good enough to be at least above average.

So than Mr. Never Looks in the Mirror will fire all the offensive coaches cause it certainly can't be him!

GB's O line:

Colledge, Wells, Spitz, Sitton, Barbre

vs.

Det's Oline. Mostly assembled by GM Matt Millen

Backus, Loper, Railoa, Peterman, Cherilus

Arguably Det's O line is more talented than the Packers. Tauscher was not going to play half the season and instead of looking for a vet backup, Thompson chose to do nothing, Clifton was questionable based on a history of injuries coming into the season going the whole season and again Thompson chose to do nothing. Thompson's off season grade D-.

Just like BF, AR's will take the blame for the inept lack of talent around him, the ability to run the ball and protect the passer. Nothing has changed.

No this one is on M3 and TT and I could care less if anyone knows it or not. Colledge better stay heathy, who plays LT next? There can be no more injuries on OL or the new GM will be drafting top five, I'm I ahead of the curve maybe and maybe they will get their pad level lower.

Exactly! After all, it can't be the guys on the field.. it has to be the coaching... or the equipment manager, or the grass, or the weather.....

Of course every team has three starting caliber left tackles on their roster. Only the Packers have shorted depth at that position. Before we decide if this line is inept or not, why don't we see how the next 13 games play out. It has been a rocky start but Barbre and Sitton certainly COULD improve and the remaining three were starters in the NFC championship game. I don't buy the idea that the line has been bad for the last 4 years. It might not be elite, but the Packers playmakers have had some success and there is really no way to disconnect the line from that totally. Even if it is 20th best in the league (and I am totally making that number up for argument's sake), that would make it lower middle of the pack, not the worst. Thompson is counting on Barbre, Sitton and Lang to provide the depth and improvement. I guess I am willing to wait for more games to be played before branding the line a failure.

To DaGunna, do you really want the Lions o-line over the Packers?