As one not big on instant draft grading I find this funny


#1

I wonder if he got input on the picks?


#2

Rodgers didn’t get any input. But he shouldn’t have to deal with making up for a lack off defense like the past several years.


#3

Amen to that. My favorite quote from that article

Meanwhile, the Packers have wasted Rodgers’ prime with horrible defenses.

It’s something Bill Belichick realized long ago with Brady. Brady can win games practically by himself, but you don’t want him to.

So so true. It has been incredibly frustrating to watch.


#4

ProFootballFocus graded each team’s draft. The grades were from Elite down to Below Average Green Bay’s draft was graded Elite as were Cowboys & Jets. All three teams in the PACKERS Division were graded Below Average.:rofl:


#5

If I had to give it a grade, I would give it a B, which could go to an A if the 2 corners hit, one receiver contributes and the 3rd round pick plays good st and can contribute in ST. That Lb might be a sleeper…


#6

I was surprised that 32% of Acme respondents gave them an F. I guess they thought PR should have come first. And wanted more Te probably too.

I never thought the PR would be taken. I didn’t like Chubb and would note apparently Cleveland didn’t either. I also clearly didn’t like Landry. I really love Davenport, but the school thing makes it impossible for him to grade high with the Packers. Teams also apparently had concerns about him being timid and something of a loner. I think that can be a good thing, but some were concerned that he might not handle adversity early all that well.

I have no problems with corners, but given how much draft capital they have invested these corners have to work…


#7

This is how I would grade it

Round 1. A-
Round 2. A+
Round 3. B
Round 4. B+
Round 5. B (Would have been an A if not for drafting a punter)
Round 6. A
Round 7. C

Over all Grade: B


#8

Yeah, I would give 1-3 A, 4-7 a C. I am not as hard on the ST guys. They don’t like Vogel, and the kid from Alabama has a big leg. A little elongated in his steps, but a big leg. When it gets to 7 who knows. And the very last kid, could make this team on ST, he is very fast…

This draft is more like some of the old Wolf drafts after 3 where he was building out the team , for good or bad…:


#9

@sarahfar That 32% from Acme who gave an ‘F’ grade show how inept they are, by that grade.

For example, how many on that forum gave a negative C-, D+, D, D-, F+, compared to those that gave it a bottom ranked F (I don’t think they do F-). That means it is just lazy venting. There are probably too many A+ grades, as well.


#10

I’m still confused by the Scott draft pick in 5th round. I thought Vogel was impressive last year, especially after setting the franchise record for net average I believe. Why would you draft a punter, especially in the 5th round, if you have essentially a young and proven punter in Vogel? I do hold out hope that Scott will be a great punter, he was impressive in college, though I still don’t undertstand the why part of this move. In two years from now, Scott could be unemployed and Vogel in the pro-bowl.


#11

@StLouisPackFan. You are not confused The answer to why the Scott pick was made is (inevitably) because they think he is an upgrade, it’s as simple as that - and what else, could it have been (I have heard no whispers of Vogel being a bad lockerroom guy, in trouble wih the law, having drug problems, etc.

To re-frame what you were saying, you simply didn’t agree with that pick (and it IS a high pick for a punter, i agree on that). I think the Packers rationale may have been that since they ended up with 11 picks, it is hard for every pick to make the roster - therefore they draft a guy who think has a good chance at that. Given Vogel’s reaction, he thought that as well.


#12

So you are saying they really didn’t try after the punter. Apparently he was the best punter in the draft.


#13

Hey ! I found out how to do a quote on a post…

To answer your question, I would say that the high number of picks allowed them a luxury pick or two (P and LS). I am not saying they didn’t try after the punter, it’s actually the opposite - them trying to get guys who WILL make the roster. P and LS drafted well, anywhere, should be among the leaders at their position. Easier for them to make the cut than if the Packers had taken a 6th corner or 7th WR.

Later picks have a low success rate, so one of the top 3 punters or a top LS have a rather better chance of making the team. However, since you only want one of each, then its time to go back to getting guys who they think can help the ST unit in other ways (Scantling, Donnerson) or develop into something (Looney, St.Brown).


#14

St. Brown is more of a sure thing compared to the first two WRs taken. He was flagged as a pre Madonna type mentally that made him fall. While he is more talented than the first taken, he has the risk of causing issues and taking plays off similar to Randy Moss.

I really like the punter and LS picks but IMO they were taken too early. But I guess they didn’t other teams may have drafted them.


#15

I know ESB didn’t do ST in college, but i wonder how much of that primadonna label is him, and how much is bleed-over from his dad ?

Whatever is true, you’ve got to pull for a guy with a middle name of Imhotep (ancient Egyptian architect of pyramids). Beats Atari (Bigby) comfortably, but not quite as good as a guy from a previous draft (not a Packer), called Mister Cobble (Mister was his Christian name).


#16

You are right, he stunk without a QB. He was a world beater with Kizor. Imagine what he could do with Rodgers who makes street walkers look all pro.


#17

Picked too early?

The long snapper was picked in the 2nd half of the last round, how much later could we have picked him?

Then for Scott (punter), he was picked right at the end of 5. A kicker had just been selected a couple spots before us and another punter was selected right after us. If we think we got the best punter in the draft, picking him where we did was the only way we were going to get him. If you’re going to get the best punter in the draft, I don’t see how the tail end of the 5th round is too early.


#18

I believe that Michael Dickson*, P, Texas - was the best Punter in the draft.


#19

Ah yeah, I forgot Dickson, who the Seahawks picked 23 slots earlier and traded up to get. Was he picked too early?

Personally, I see the two basically the same, I can see an argument to be made in either direction. They both have strong legs and can both keep it inside the 20. Personally, I don’t think either was picked too early.


#20

People and writers are way to concerned about a 5th RD pick for a punter. The action will be Packer performance, the teams play, those first two picks relative to what they passed on, and how well or poorly the OL and Perry/Matthews play. I like the Punter. But I think MM/Campen and throw in Winston Moss are toxic to young players. Don’t like any of the 3.