Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
2 Pages12>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
MintBaconDrivel  
#1 Posted : Tuesday, April 23, 2013 2:56:53 PM(UTC)
JerseyAl said:
An interesting discussion about the Packers draft and develop philosophy broke out in the comments section of this post the other day. The basic question that came out of the discussion was this: What does draft and develop mean to you? Draft and develop might mean different things to different people. The various meanings appear [...]
PackerTraxx  
#2 Posted : Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:25:59 PM(UTC)
It means you better have good coaches. :-s o:)
wpr  
#3 Posted : Tuesday, April 23, 2013 4:33:26 PM(UTC)
It means it is an excuse to not sign quality FAs to round out the team and fill in holes that normally occur in the roster.
steveishere  
#4 Posted : Tuesday, April 23, 2013 5:42:49 PM(UTC)
It means you trust that you drafted quality players who will still become good football players even if they don't make a huge impact in the first year or two.
TheKanataThrilla  
#5 Posted : Tuesday, April 23, 2013 6:10:03 PM(UTC)
To me it keeps the philosophy that if you work hard and stay loyal the team will reward you. I do think that this philosophy works for the most part in that it makes for greater morale from the players that the team is not always looking for FAs to take your job.
nerdmann  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, April 23, 2013 9:09:10 PM(UTC)
TheKanataThrilla said: Go to Quoted Post
To me it keeps the philosophy that if you work hard and stay loyal the team will reward you. I do think that this philosophy works for the most part in that it makes for greater morale from the players that the team is not always looking for FAs to take your job.


This and it also means you have a viable team for the long term, because you don't subject yourself to cap hell.
PackFanWithTwins  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, April 23, 2013 10:17:44 PM(UTC)
A way to build and maintain a core of players. Hopefully successfully which keeps a team in contention year after year. Combine it with smart and well timed FA and some luck and we can win another SB.
play2win  
#8 Posted : Wednesday, April 24, 2013 6:37:35 AM(UTC)
I don't like how strict this philosophy is. It means there is more pressure put on young, inexperienced players to fill important gaps in our roster, and the "need" factor then becomes more in play on draft day. At least, it seems that way.

Will we pass on a top WR to fill a DL need this draft in R1? Maybe. Maybe not. Nab that WR and your DL need is still unaddressed going into the 2nd day of the draft. Now, you maybe reach on a day two player to fill a hole, hoping he will not only start, but be a difference maker, where you really need one.

There is risk with this philosophy that could make us miss out on top talent, both in FA and in the draft.
PackerTraxx  
#9 Posted : Wednesday, April 24, 2013 7:23:21 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
It means it is an excuse to not sign quality FAs to round out the team and fill in holes that normally occur in the roster.


Hopefully this is not true. In a couple of cases, I'm sorry to say, I believe it has been. I like building on the draft as a basic philosiphy, but all avenues need to be used to build/better the team.
wpr  
#10 Posted : Wednesday, April 24, 2013 7:45:11 AM(UTC)
PackerTraxx said: Go to Quoted Post
Hopefully this is not true. In a couple of cases, I'm sorry to say, I believe it has been. I like building on the draft as a basic philosiphy, but all avenues need to be used to build/better the team.


I was being just a bit of a smart @ss. But there are times when it seems like the team fails to use every method available to them because they are a "draft and develop" team.

It is really impossible to have every spot on the roster filled with depth backing up all the starters. Sometimes it is better to have the drafted players backing up and one day taking the place of a UFA that they signed.

Then again I have wondered if GB is content with winning the division and being in the playoffs on a consistent basis or spending more money and being a serious contender for a SB.

I could live with a team that was in the SB every 5 years and then had to tear the team down and rebuilt making it back 5 years later over a team that went 11-5 or 10-6 every single year, year after year, only to lose in the playoffs in either round 1 or 2.
nerdmann  
#11 Posted : Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:54:13 AM(UTC)
play2win said: Go to Quoted Post
I don't like how strict this philosophy is. It means there is more pressure put on young, inexperienced players to fill important gaps in our roster, and the "need" factor then becomes more in play on draft day. At least, it seems that way.

Will we pass on a top WR to fill a DL need this draft in R1? Maybe. Maybe not. Nab that WR and your DL need is still unaddressed going into the 2nd day of the draft. Now, you maybe reach on a day two player to fill a hole, hoping he will not only start, but be a difference maker, where you really need one.

There is risk with this philosophy that could make us miss out on top talent, both in FA and in the draft.


For every Albert Haynesworth that Ted passes over, he signs a DuJuan Harris, Dez Moses, Sam Shields. Even an Erik Walden or a Harold Green. Part of the system is that you have great talent evaluators, who are capable of assessing value.
Wade  
#12 Posted : Thursday, April 25, 2013 9:01:44 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
I was being just a bit of a smart @ss. But there are times when it seems like the team fails to use every method available to them because they are a "draft and develop" team.

It is really impossible to have every spot on the roster filled with depth backing up all the starters. Sometimes it is better to have the drafted players backing up and one day taking the place of a UFA that they signed.

Then again I have wondered if GB is content with winning the division and being in the playoffs on a consistent basis or spending more money and being a serious contender for a SB.

I could live with a team that was in the SB every 5 years and then had to tear the team down and rebuilt making it back 5 years later over a team that went 11-5 or 10-6 every single year, year after year, only to lose in the playoffs in either round 1 or 2.


I agree. I *hate* it when the team loses playoff games.

Especially at home. Remember when the Packers simply did not lose in the playoffs at home?

Actually, I wonder if there is some correlation between this overly (IMO) skewed reliance on draft-and-develop-the-potential approach and the Packers less than stellar "home field advantage" in the Thompson/McCarthy era.

Wade  
#13 Posted : Thursday, April 25, 2013 9:03:48 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
For every Albert Haynesworth that Ted passes over, he signs a DuJuan Harris, Dez Moses, Sam Shields. Even an Erik Walden or a Harold Green. Part of the system is that you have great talent evaluators, who are capable of assessing value.


Except, in my opinion, with respect to the OL.

Take away the out-of-the-park-HR that was Josh Sitton, and this personnel department can only seem to find "potential" and "serviceable" on the OL.

Zero2Cool  
#14 Posted : Thursday, April 25, 2013 9:32:14 AM(UTC)
Wade said: Go to Quoted Post
Except, in my opinion, with respect to the OL.

Take away the out-of-the-park-HR that was Josh Sitton, and this personnel department can only seem to find "potential" and "serviceable" on the OL.



I will continue to put blame on the OL coach instead of Ted Thompson. Packers have drafted a lot of OL over the years ... a lot.
steveishere  
#15 Posted : Thursday, April 25, 2013 10:01:29 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post

I could live with a team that was in the SB every 5 years and then had to tear the team down and rebuilt making it back 5 years later over a team that went 11-5 or 10-6 every single year, year after year, only to lose in the playoffs in either round 1 or 2.


Except that isn't how it works and no you wouldn't be content with that anyways. Look at all of the people who are discontent now because we haven't won the Superbowl in just 2 years. The teams that have the best chance at winning the Superbowl are the ones that are more consistent with their roster and stay competitive year after year. It does take a lot of luck to get through a playoff run and win the Superbowl and trying to bet it all on 1 season every few years is the dumbest way to go about it.
play2win  
#16 Posted : Thursday, April 25, 2013 10:34:29 AM(UTC)
Breno Giacomini would have been good to keep around. I do not understand how they could let a guy like that walk. He is exactly what we could use now. Started all 16 games at RT last year for the Seahawks. We could be switching Bulaga to LT and save a pick there.
wpr  
#17 Posted : Thursday, April 25, 2013 10:44:03 AM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
Except that isn't how it works and no you wouldn't be content with that anyways. Look at all of the people who are discontent now because we haven't won the Superbowl in just 2 years. The teams that have the best chance at winning the Superbowl are the ones that are more consistent with their roster and stay competitive year after year. It does take a lot of luck to get through a playoff run and win the Superbowl and trying to bet it all on 1 season every few years is the dumbest way to go about it.


Thank you for telling me how I feel. Until reading this I did not know. [palm]

I am content. Would I like a SB this year? Sure. Who wouldn't? Do I demand it or think that the team is a failure? No. Am I disappointed at the lack of effort to pick up QUALITY FAs to fill some of those needs? Sure I am.

Of course my "5 year plan" doesn't work exactly as I illustrated. It is only a hypothetical example. They need to go get the guys required to fill the gaps are there and stop trying to use bubble gum and duct tape. Waiting 2, 3 or 4 years for someone to grow up and fill a position only leads to more holes elsewhere during that time period.

Once again you totally miss the point. I am not saying go "Phillie" and grab 12 high priced FAs this year then sit back and dismantle the team next year. I said pick up a QUALITY player or two to fill a gap. (every team has them.) Become a playoff winning caliber team not a team that only wins against weak competition during the season then folds when the pressure is on. In my example I am saying if the worse case scenario is that you end up with 4 off years and one SB winning championship year and that cycle repeats every 5 years WITH CHAMPIONSHIPS the fans would except it. even you. In reality why would a team totally fall apart? It wouldn't.
Zero2Cool  
#18 Posted : Thursday, April 25, 2013 11:25:19 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
I said pick up a QUALITY player or two to fill a gap. (every team has them.)


Problem with that is the Packers aren't a player or two away from being a certain Super Bowl contender. They can't afford to gamble over paying for tier 2 talent with a tier 1 salary because they have quite a few players to re-sign themselves. It's easier to groom a new to NFL player to your methods and teachings than it is to grab a player that's been in a different system for X years. You then have to break them of their habits.

I don't think free agency yields enough reward for the risk.

play2win  
#19 Posted : Thursday, April 25, 2013 11:35:02 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
Problem with that is the Packers aren't a player or two away from being a certain Super Bowl contender. They can't afford to gamble over paying for tier 2 talent with a tier 1 salary because they have quite a few players to re-sign themselves. It's easier to groom a new to NFL player to your methods and teachings than it is to grab a player that's been in a different system for X years. You then have to break them of their habits.

I don't think free agency yields enough reward for the risk.



I don't think he is saying they are only one or two players away from winning a Championship, just that one or two FAs of high quality can help you to get there, taking pressure off of key areas that you normally fill with draft picks. For instance, we had a couple of scenarios where we had high calibre DTs, DEs, RBs and Ss looking for a new team this offseason. We didn't really play, so they went elsewhere. I would have loved to get one of them, maybe two of them, to allow a bit more freedom this draft, insuring our roster was truly complete.

We have so many holes, some bigger than others at some real need positions on this roster. One or two FA signings could have helped. They still may.
Wade  
#20 Posted : Thursday, April 25, 2013 11:44:16 AM(UTC)
play2win said: Go to Quoted Post
Breno Giacomini would have been good to keep around. I do not understand how they could let a guy like that walk. He is exactly what we could use now. Started all 16 games at RT last year for the Seahawks. We could be switching Bulaga to LT and save a pick there.


Methinks you may be committing the Daryl Colledge fallacy here. Colledge has started how many games in his career. How many games has he looked, for GB or for St. Louis, like a *good* starter.

Seattle looked good last year. How good did Giacomini look? Did he look more like Daryn Colledge in his "prime," or did he look more like, oh, I dunno, Steve Hutchinson or Alan Faneca in theirs.

Or, perhaps a better example, how much did he look like a Sitton and how much did he look like Colledge?

(As an aside, I don't think Bulaga has proved himself an exception to the general level of mediocrity in the Thompson/McCarthy/Campen era just yet. He might. The "potential" argument still has enough oomph it it for me to be cautiously optimistic. But he's not where we need a RT, much less a LT, to be just yet.)

Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
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.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
Smokey (2h) : R.I.P.Sir Rodger (007) Moore .
Smokey (15h) : Try Fish
Porforis (17h) : Chicken 4 dayz!
gbguy20 (22-May) : Agreed
Smokey (21-May) : Yes, I like Chick-fil-a .
Smokey (21-May) : Rabid Chicken ? LOL
rabidgopher04 (21-May) : Chick fil a
Zero2Cool (20-May) : Penguins & Bad Guys Tied 2 apiece! LETS GO PENS!
Smokey (20-May) : Who sells the best Chicken Sandwich ? Wendy, the King, McD, etc. ?
Smokey (20-May) : Just Visiting ? Join and post today !
Zero2Cool (18-May) : Screw you. (signed Pens fan)
TheKanataThrilla (18-May) : Go Sens!!! Will be in the crowd for the Friday game.
Smokey (18-May) : E.Lacy makes weight in Seattle by 2 lbs. (253 lbs.)
buckeyepackfan (17-May) : Blount signs 1 year deal with Eagles.
DarkaneRules (14-May) : and still! Miocic & Jedrzejczyk
Zero2Cool (13-May) : RP ... you mean Go Pens ... I fix for you.
RaiderPride (13-May) : Gotta Love P.K. T.K.T. I agree.. Go Preds.
Smokey (12-May) : CB Kevin King signs 4 yr deal, no 5th year option .
TheKanataThrilla (12-May) : Go Nashville in the West
TheKanataThrilla (12-May) : My son is wearing his Mario Lemieux Pens shirt and my daughter is wearing he Sens shirt. We win no matter what.
Zero2Cool (11-May) : Aaron Nagler:Packers announce first training camp practice to be held Thursday, July 27
Zero2Cool (11-May) : Capitals are dirty weak trash.
Zero2Cool (11-May) : NHL is great! PENGUINS!!!!
yooperfan (10-May) : Screw the NBA and the NHL, neither are worth watching!
wpr (10-May) : hahaha. Poor Bettman. Worth the price to see it.
TheKanataThrilla (10-May) : Bettman would blow a gasket if it was an all-Canadian finals. I want Nashville as I am a huge Mike Fisher fan.
Smokey (10-May) : Cheap Shot ? I think not .
wpr (10-May) : Thrilla how about an all Canada Finals?
TheKanataThrilla (10-May) : Pens tomorrow. Screw you Caps for the cheap shot on Crosby.
TheKanataThrilla (10-May) : Go Sens. Want to see the Sens pull it out tomorrow.
DarkaneRules (9-May) : that's a good thing. means the players are staying out of trouble
DoddPower (9-May) : awfully quiet in here
DoddPower (3-May) : darn
Zero2Cool (3-May) : Bob McGinn is leaving and the Packers
DarkaneRules (1-May) : Cutting two RBs today! Now drafting 3 makes more sense!
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Saturday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
16m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

22-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

22-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

21-May / Packers Draft Threads / Smokey

20-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

19-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

19-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

18-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

18-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / hardrocker950

18-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

18-May / Around The NFL / Smokey

18-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

17-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

Headlines