You are not logged in. Join Free! | Log In Thank you!    

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

4 Pages<1234>
Share
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline QCHuskerFan  
#16 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 10:57:55 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 203
Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 60
Applause Received: 93

Originally Posted by: Porforis Go to Quoted Post
QB or P. Best player available or no, you don't need to draft someone that has zero value for your team when we've got holes to fill.


Isn't that how we got AR?

I agree with you, but I just found it ironic when I read this.
blank
Offline play2win  
#17 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 12:07:55 PM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,243
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 844
Applause Received: 547

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Isn't that how we got AR?

I agree with you, but I just found it ironic when I read this.


No. Favre's successor WAS a hole to fill. Without question. He had been feigning retirement for some time prior. The fact that Rodgers dropped in our laps was a giant stroke of good luck. He was mocked to go #4 to TB by Walter.

We had defensive needs at the time in our secondary. Walter had us mocked to pick CB R1, then to pick QB Charlie Frye R2. I saw Matt Cassel as our R1 pick in a Scout mock. So, word was out, and really, it was common knowledge that we needed a QB. Fave was entering his 14th season.

Not bustin' your balls QCHuskerFan, but that is the way it was then. I think nearly everyone thought, "well, OK..." when we went Rodgers. The pick made perfect sense. Favre had seemed invincible, but everyone knew his time was running out, and getting his replacement was imperative over those next two seasons.

Funny too, that those defensive needs were addressed with Ted's R2 pick of Nick Collins. What a draft!
Offline QCHuskerFan  
#18 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 12:45:51 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 203
Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 60
Applause Received: 93

Originally Posted by: play2win Go to Quoted Post
No. Favre's successor WAS a hole to fill. Without question. He had been feigning retirement for some time prior. The fact that Rodgers dropped in our laps was a giant stroke of good luck. He was mocked to go #4 to TB by Walter.

We had defensive needs at the time in our secondary. Walter had us mocked to pick CB R1, then to pick QB Charlie Frye R2. I saw Matt Cassel as our R1 pick in a Scout mock. So, word was out, and really, it was common knowledge that we needed a QB. Fave was entering his 14th season.

Not bustin' your balls QCHuskerFan, but that is the way it was then. I think nearly everyone thought, "well, OK..." when we went Rodgers. The pick made perfect sense. Favre had seemed invincible, but everyone knew his time was running out, and getting his replacement was imperative over those next two seasons.

Funny too, that those defensive needs were addressed with Ted's R2 pick of Nick Collins. What a draft!


We look at value differently. Aaron Rodgers contributed nothing to the team in the 3 years after he was drafted. In hindsight, was it a great pick, yes. But to me, it offered zero value at the time. And for the following 2 years. Unique situation, though.

Don't distort history. There was a tremendous amount of criticism at the time. The team had immediate needs. They had gone 10-6 the previous season and were the #3 playoff seed. They were outclassed in Rd 1 of the playoffs. I would suggest that most people felt that team's window was small, just like right now. TT's pick addressed none of the needs that would get that team farther in the playoffs. Plenty of people were pissed! Favre was at the front of the line. Instead of giving him a player of immediate use, Ted Thompson chose someone that wouldn't see the field. Packers ended 2005 at 4-12 and out of the playoffs. Aaron Rodgers offered no value to that team or the following 2 years.

If Ted Thompson picked someone this year in the first round that was not expected would see the field this year, would you see value?
blank
Offline Pack93z  
#19 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 12:52:30 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

U.S. Minor Islands
Posts: 12,605
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 352
Applause Received: 936

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
We look at value differently. Aaron Rodgers contributed nothing to the team in the 3 years after he was drafted. In hindsight, was it a great pick, yes. But to me, it offered zero value at the time. And for the following 2 years. Unique situation, though.

Don't distort history. There was a tremendous amount of criticism at the time. The team had immediate needs. They had gone 10-6 the previous season and were the #3 playoff seed. They were outclassed in Rd 1 of the playoffs. I would suggest that most people felt that team's window was small, just like right now. TT's pick addressed none of the needs that would get that team farther in the playoffs. Plenty of people were pissed! Favre was at the front of the line. Instead of giving him a player of immediate use, Ted Thompson chose someone that wouldn't see the field. Packers ended 2005 at 4-12 and out of the playoffs. Aaron Rodgers offered no value to that team or the following 2 years.

If Ted Thompson picked someone this year in the first round that was not expected would see the field this year, would you see value?


In the same regard there are a couple of other factors.

1. Favre's yearly dance with retirement.. Rodgers slipping to us only helped push the timeline (by a couple of rounds maybe) the need to find a successor.

2. Additionally that was an aging team that had cap issues and some real depth concern, hence Sherman being relived by Thompson in the first place.

3. We currently still have a team with a relatively large window of opportunity with Rodgers at the helm to make some noise. Favre was closer to the end than the beginning and with the roster being turned over because of issue #2 it wasn't clear how fast the team could reload for a run.
The wolves will never lose sleep over the feelings of the sheep.

UserPostedImage
Offline play2win  
#20 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 1:09:53 PM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,243
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 844
Applause Received: 547

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
We look at value differently. Aaron Rodgers contributed nothing to the team in the 3 years after he was drafted. In hindsight, was it a great pick, yes. But to me, it offered zero value at the time. And for the following 2 years. Unique situation, though.

Don't distort history. There was a tremendous amount of criticism at the time. The team had immediate needs. They had gone 10-6 the previous season and were the #3 playoff seed. They were outclassed in Rd 1 of the playoffs. I would suggest that most people felt that team's window was small, just like right now. TT's pick addressed none of the needs that would get that team farther in the playoffs. Plenty of people were pissed! Favre was at the front of the line. Instead of giving him a player of immediate use, Ted Thompson chose someone that wouldn't see the field. Packers ended 2005 at 4-12 and out of the playoffs. Aaron Rodgers offered no value to that team or the following 2 years.

If Ted Thompson picked someone this year in the first round that was not expected would see the field this year, would you see value?


I would be pissed.

And please, don't give me that distort history BS. I clearly said we needed help in the secondary going into that draft. AND we needed an eventual replacement for Favre. YOU are distorting history by saying we didn't need a QB.

Big difference with Rodgers going into his 8th season, vs. Favre going into his 14th.
Offline QCHuskerFan  
#21 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 2:46:11 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 203
Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 60
Applause Received: 93

Please let me know where I said there was no need for a QB. I am saying that picking Aaron Rodgers with the number 1 pick brought no direct value to the team in 2005. Or 2006. Or 2007. Look it up. Let me know what I missed.

The original comment I responded to was Porforis saying that you don't draft someone in the first round with zero value when you have needs. I responded that's what Rodgers was. I am quite aware why it was done and it worked out incredibly well. But someone that doesn't start a game for 3 years and only plays in 7 total in that 3 year time is offering nothing to that team. The future team? Maybe. But AR's ~350 passing yards in 3 years is not an impact. He offered no value to the teams in 2005, 2006 or 2007. If Favre had retired the day after the draft in 2005, then he would have had immediate value. But Favre didn't.

You said, "I think nearly everyone thought, "well, OK..." when we went Rodgers. The pick made perfect sense. Favre had seemed invincible, but everyone knew his time was running out, and getting his replacement was imperative over those next two seasons." Nearly everyone did not think OK. Finding a replacement for Favre was a priority. But it was not necessary to draft that person in Rd 1, when there were other needs. Much of Packer Nation was quite upset. That is why I accused you of distorting history. Choosing to look at the past with rose colored glasses, does not change the past. Favre still had a tremendous amount of supporters that viewed this draft choice as the franchise turning their back on #4 as well as failing to make the team markedly better. Doesn't mean it wasn't the right choice. Just didn't make it overwhelmingly popular. Additionally, Favre played 6 years after that draft so it was not "imperative to get his replacement in the next 2 years" as you stated. But that's hindsight.

Did drafting Aaron Rodgers in the first round in 2005 work out well for the Pack? Duh. But that doesn't mean it offered value at the time.
blank
Offline QCHuskerFan  
#22 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 2:50:25 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 203
Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 60
Applause Received: 93

Originally Posted by: Pack93z Go to Quoted Post
In the same regard there are a couple of other factors.

1. Favre's yearly dance with retirement.. Rodgers slipping to us only helped push the timeline (by a couple of rounds maybe) the need to find a successor.

2. Additionally that was an aging team that had cap issues and some real depth concern, hence Sherman being relived by Thompson in the first place.

3. We currently still have a team with a relatively large window of opportunity with Rodgers at the helm to make some noise. Favre was closer to the end than the beginning and with the roster being turned over because of issue #2 it wasn't clear how fast the team could reload for a run.


I sincerely hope you are correct in #3. I am concerned that after extending AR, Raji, Matthews, that the window will be very small. Those 3 could easily consume 30-35% of the CAP. I am not sure that is feasible for fielding a competitive team. I hope we can, but...
blank
Offline play2win  
#23 Posted : Wednesday, March 6, 2013 2:52:33 PM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,243
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 844
Applause Received: 547

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Please let me know where I said there was no need for a QB. I am saying that picking Aaron Rodgers with the number 1 pick brought no direct value to the team in 2005. Or 2006. Or 2007. Look it up. Let me know what I missed.

The original comment I responded to was Porforis saying that you don't draft someone in the first round with zero value when you have needs. I responded that's what Rodgers was. I am quite aware why it was done and it worked out incredibly well. But someone that doesn't start a game for 3 years and only plays in 7 total in that 3 year time is offering nothing to that team. The future team? Maybe. But AR's ~350 passing yards in 3 years is not an impact. He offered no value to the teams in 2005, 2006 or 2007. If Favre had retired the day after the draft in 2005, then he would have had immediate value. But Favre didn't.

You said, "I think nearly everyone thought, "well, OK..." when we went Rodgers. The pick made perfect sense. Favre had seemed invincible, but everyone knew his time was running out, and getting his replacement was imperative over those next two seasons." Nearly everyone did not think OK. Finding a replacement for Favre was a priority. But it was not necessary to draft that person in Rd 1, when there were other needs. Much of Packer Nation was quite upset. That is why I accused you of distorting history. Choosing to look at the past with rose colored glasses, does not change the past. Favre still had a tremendous amount of supporters that viewed this draft choice as the franchise turning their back on #4 as well as failing to make the team markedly better. Doesn't mean it wasn't the right choice. Just didn't make it overwhelmingly popular. Additionally, Favre played 6 years after that draft so it was not "imperative to get his replacement in the next 2 years" as you stated. But that's hindsight.

Did drafting Aaron Rodgers in the first round in 2005 work out well for the Pack? Duh. But that doesn't mean it offered value at the time.


This is such BS.

I clearly remember the boo birds lining the fence that 2005 training camp. I'm just talking about what I believe was the majority of Packers fans, understanding fully that we were going to have to address a replacement for Favre going into his 14th season. When a QB who was rated #1 overall for most of the period leading up to that draft, falls to 24, yeah, if you like him you take him. It is my belief MOST fans understood the move by Thompson that day.

I'll say this too, there is a twisted logic to thinking you can draft a player and immediately solve a problem. Most draftees require a good year of development at the pro level before they make significant contributions. Sure there are exceptions to that, but they are few. That is why I am pushing for Ted to make some good moves in FA this season. We need help now, and we've needed it in the same places for two years running, with no improvement.

Edited by user Wednesday, March 6, 2013 3:41:42 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Offline stevegb  
#24 Posted : Thursday, March 7, 2013 2:15:19 AM(UTC)
stevegb

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 110
Joined: 10/30/2006(UTC)

Applause Given: 9
Applause Received: 4

Outside of the obvious P and K in the first round my biggest WTF Ted selections would probably be in the CB position or maybe the OLB position. I think we are very deep at CB and I'd be a little upset if we gave up on Perry so early. Don't get me wrong I don't mind if we draft either a CB or OLB but I'd expect it to be at least 3rd round or later.

QB would be disappointing but NE continually draft highly touted QB's late in the first round and manage to trade them off for future mid-round picks+. We have a very good QB coaching staff in Green bay so I'd have confidence we could get some pretty good value for them, although Ted has never done anything to prove hes a very good trader.
blank
Offline nerdmann  
#25 Posted : Thursday, March 7, 2013 9:18:04 AM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Posts: 6,515
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,106
Applause Received: 470

Originally Posted by: stevegb Go to Quoted Post
Outside of the obvious P and K in the first round my biggest WTF Ted selections would probably be in the CB position or maybe the OLB position. I think we are very deep at CB and I'd be a little upset if we gave up on Perry so early. Don't get me wrong I don't mind if we draft either a CB or OLB but I'd expect it to be at least 3rd round or later.

QB would be disappointing but NE continually draft highly touted QB's late in the first round and manage to trade them off for future mid-round picks+. We have a very good QB coaching staff in Green bay so I'd have confidence we could get some pretty good value for them, although Ted has never done anything to prove hes a very good trader.


We need as many stud OLBs as we can get.

And I expect Perry AND Moses to be able to get it done this year.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline Yerko  
#26 Posted : Tuesday, March 12, 2013 3:39:18 PM(UTC)
Yerko

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,849
Joined: 10/15/2008(UTC)
Location: Chicago, IL

Applause Given: 108
Applause Received: 197

I'd be upset if we drafted defensive line in the first round.




Whistle
Flapper
Shhh
UserPostedImage
Offline play2win  
#27 Posted : Wednesday, March 13, 2013 4:31:57 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,243
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 844
Applause Received: 547

Originally Posted by: Yerko Go to Quoted Post
I'd be upset if we drafted defensive line in the first round.




Whistle
Flapper
Shhh


Why?
Offline texaspackerbacker  
#28 Posted : Wednesday, March 13, 2013 6:19:06 AM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,373
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 349
Applause Received: 210

Originally Posted by: Yerko Go to Quoted Post
I'd be upset if we drafted defensive line in the first round.




Whistle
Flapper
Shhh


yeah, why? I'd be upset if we don't draft a D Lineman in the first round. To answer the original question of the thread, I think RB in round one would tick me off the most. It's so easy to get good ones on the scrap heap, and so difficult - basically a crapshoot whether a first round pick becomes a star player.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
play2win on 3/13/2013(UTC)
Offline wpr  
#29 Posted : Wednesday, March 13, 2013 6:21:38 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

United States
Posts: 11,869
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,405
Applause Received: 1,192

look at his smilies. its is in jest.
"You don't hurt 'em if you don't hit 'em." Chesty Puller



UserPostedImage

Offline play2win  
#30 Posted : Wednesday, March 13, 2013 6:54:03 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,243
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 844
Applause Received: 547

Well, if they got busy in FA a bit and landed a couple of good defenders, I could see them nabbing a top RB or LT. Maybe even a TE if they were to let Finley go. As much as I want them to hit the D hard, I wouldn't have a problem with them taking a offensive player round 1.

I'm having doubts that would be the case though. So, I'm right with you texas.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages<1234>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF 2.1.0 | YAF © 2003-2014, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.394 seconds.