Looking Ahead to the Offseason UPDATED with Mock Draft

quote:

Originally posted by Herschel:
A good back still makes a marked difference. Right now they have a hobbit Sam Gado(Harris) and two Pedestrian guys who seem to have had injuries take their toll already. A good line is very important, but don't discount what a good, versatile back brings to the table.

Do they need a feature back? Yes, but I don't think they need to go fishing with picks for a back. This is a passing team as long as Rodgers is here. Green is a pass orientated, 3rd down back. Samwise Gamgee sure looked impressive but it's hard to get a feel to how he'll hold up week in and week out. Right now he's the closest thing to a feature back on this team.

Screw Benson and Starks, shouldn't even be in the equation anymore.

quote:

Originally posted by michiganjoe:

quote:

Originally posted by CUPackFan:
EDS does not look like the long-term solution of center.......

I guess I'm not convinced that TT and MM share that opinion. Not sure where TT has Jones on his board and he might prove too enticing to pass up if he's there, but my guess is EDS gets another year to prove himself.

Perhaps it's the number, but Lacey reminds me of a faster and more explosive version of Brockington and I really like him, although don't see TT making the pick.

God I hope you're wrong. EDS is maxed out as a starter. I truly don't believe TT or MM see him as a starter and if they do that is definitely a gook in the armor.

It's symbiotic, but teh Ravens line didn't play all that well this year until they re-shuffled for the playoffs.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
God I hope you're wrong. EDS is maxed out as a starter. I truly don't believe TT or MM see him as a starter and if they do that is definitely a gook in the armor.

Dude, you drew this conclusion after 5 games at center?

This draft is another bellwether moment for the team. Last year, they did the right thing and took defense with the first six picks, showing they understood just how bad things were on that side of the ball. This year, they need to do the same thing again. If they take a WR or receiving TE in the first three rounds of the draft, it will show this coaching staff and front office has lost their way and that they think they can win by emulating the Air Coryell Chargers. I say this because they are going to lose Jennings, and I'm hoping they understand that he doesn't need to be "replaced" when they still have Cobb/Jones/Nelson/Finley. There are two holes on the OL (maybe Sherrod is the answer for one of the T spots, and maybe EDS will continue to get better), and pretty much every single position but CB (and you can even make a case for it) on defense is in desperate need of a talent infusion.

quote:

Originally posted by Goalline:

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
God I hope you're wrong. EDS is maxed out as a starter. I truly don't believe TT or MM see him as a starter and if they do that is definitely a gook in the armor.

Dude, you drew this conclusion after 5 games at center?

Since he's been on the team. He had to develop into a acceptable backup for christ's sake.

Took him the same length of time as Driver did. Give the kid a chance, Henry, or I'm sending one of the bedwetters over to your house.

IMO, that only back that is good enough to run behind a crappy OL and still be great is AP. Rice and Gore are very good backs, but building your run game from the OL is a better bet than drafting RB's and hoping they can make due behind a crappy OL. Put Rice or Gore in Green Bay and I'm not convinced they'll have great years.

I'd rather spend draft picks trying to find pro bowl offensive linemen than trying to find the next Ray Rice.

quote:

Originally posted by Pack-Man:
I say this because they are going to lose Jennings, and I'm hoping they understand that he doesn't need to be "replaced" when they still have Cobb/Jones/Nelson/Finley.

Completely disagree. Do I think they need to spend a Rd 1 or 2 on a TE/WR, but you have to believe that Finley will be gone next year. So, you lose GJ and Finley in back to back years, with Quarless as a ? and no depth behind that, that we know of. As long as AR is on the team, the team/draft philosophy should be to draft WR/TE's to keep the cupboard full. Now, I could see TT moving up in the draft to get Gandalf, but who knows if he'll be there?

He is just god awful in pass protection. People can yammer all they want about a RB, this is a passing team. Do they need a solid, complimentary feature back? Yes, but it will be a complimentary position.

The whole point of drafting oline isn't just to create a better running game, it's to create a consistent pocket to let all the talent in the pass game, including RBs, to perform. EDS is a liability to the style of offense Green Bay has built.

quote:

Now, I could see TT moving up in the draft to get Gandalf, but who knows if he'll be there?

If they can fix the problems at tackle (RT will instantly become an issue if Bulaga does get a shot at LT and Sherrod isn't the answer) and center, Green/Starks/Benson/Saine/Harris (one will be cut in TC obviously) provide more than enough talent to form a legitimate threat. A feature back would be nice, and I wouldn't be let down if they took a shot at one in the first 3 rounds, but a solid committee of RBs can do great things when put behind a great OL.

I don't think we can look at the draft as Ted choosing whether, say, Center is a bigger hole than Safety. The issue is whether the safety or center is the better player available when GB is on the clock.

Even if Ted believes EDS can be the starting center next year, I don't think he would hesitate to pull the trigger on a C in the draft if he has the highest grade.

Disagree. If Buluga makes the switch to LT and Newhouse to RT, they will be fine. I personally believe Newhouse can get even better. Also not ruling out what Sherrod brings to the table. The tackle position is what really took a hit injury wise this year yet it was the Center position that was the true liability.

quote:

Originally posted by IL_Pack_Fan:
I don't think we can look at the draft as Ted choosing whether, say, Center is a bigger hole than Safety. The issue is whether the safety or center is the better player available when GB is on the clock.

Even if Ted believes EDS can be the starting center next year, I don't think he would hesitate to pull the trigger on a C in the draft if he has the highest grade.

Goes without saying but this is pretty much a fan wish list/bull**** session. I wouldn't have it any other way than BPA.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
He is just god awful in pass protection. People can yammer all they want about a RB, this is a passing team. Do they need a solid, complimentary feature back? Yes, but it will be a complimentary position.

The whole point of drafting oline isn't just to create a better running game, it's to create a consistent pocket to let all the talent in the pass game, including RBs, to perform. EDS is a liability to the style of offense Green Bay has built.

Pretty much. Giving up 51 sacks is just ridiculous. Rodgers will always take some additional sacks (15 were on him), but they can still do a lot better than that. For the sake of comparison, Sherman's OLs gave up 22 sacks on Favre in 2001, 26 in '02, 19 in '03 and 12 in '04. Favre was completely immobile by that point in his career, an easy target, but they were able to keep him upright. Like I said, Rodgers will always take some sacks, but the way it's going now isn't just bad or stupid, it's flat out insanity when you consider his history with concussions.

In theory, a foursome of Newhouse, Bulaga, Sherrod and Barclay should be adequate at tackle. Can they do better? Sure, but I don't see a player in the draft where the Packers are picking that would be sufficiently better than those guys (other than maybe Barclay). Injuries are obviously a question mark, but so is reaching for an offensive tackle in the draft. And history shows that teams reach for OT's in the draft. However, I think a great guard or center will be available that could beat out Lang or EDS. I've read great things about Cooper and Jones and both could be available to the Packers in the first. I'm just sick of watching the o-line get knocked back 2 yards off the snap.

If they lose Finley after 2013, then they worry about it in the 2014 draft. I wouldn't go crazy if they do draft a well rounded TE in the first two rounds (better be a damn good blocker) or any TE or WR in round 3. But a WR or pure receiving TE in the first two rounds would show that an Air Coryell mentality has developed at 1265 Lombardi. Elite quarterbacks like Rodgers do not need a stable of Pro Bowl WRs and TEs to win in this league. It's actually worked to their detriment at times in the past when him and Mike have too many fun toys to play with in the passing game.

So they lose Finley in 13, draft a TE in 14, take a couple of years to develop, and we are talking about a possible replacement for Finely by '17/18. That's why you keep the offensive weapons loaded, and draft another this year for future losses, instead of drafting the year you lose talent.

My point is TT has to keep drafting potential offensive playmakers, and TE is one area, where could be woefully short, while, it looks like the TE position is a matchup nightmare for many other teams.

quote:

Originally posted by Shoeless Joe:
[QUOTE]Now, I could see TT moving up in the draft to get Gandalf, but who knows if he'll be there?

NICE!!!! I'm still learning on how to drop in pics.

quote:

Originally posted by PackerRuss:
So they lose Finley in 13, draft a TE in 14, take a couple of years to develop, and we are talking about a possible replacement for Finely by '17/18. That's why you keep the offensive weapons loaded, and draft another this year for future losses, instead of drafting the year you lose talent.

My point is TT has to keep drafting potential offensive playmakers, and TE is one area, where could be woefully short, while, it looks like the TE position is a matchup nightmare for many other teams.

Keep the receiver cupboards full, and the defensive and OL cupboards bare. Air Coryell football looks extremely ugly in January in NE Wisconsin. Or anywhere against teams who are tough in the trenches, for that matter.

I'm all about upgrading the lines, and upgrading everywhere we can, but your point was a WR or athletic TE in Rds 1-3, and TT has lost his way. My point is I don't see that being the case, since he'll want to continue to restock the offensive weapons. Now, if there is a similar grade between an ILB and a TE in Rd 2, of course you go with the "need". But single handedly saying if TT takes a WR/TE in Rd 1-3 TT is lost, I just don't agree with.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:

quote:

Originally posted by Herschel:
A good back still makes a marked difference. Right now they have a hobbit Sam Gado(Harris) and two Pedestrian guys who seem to have had injuries take their toll already. A good line is very important, but don't discount what a good, versatile back brings to the table.

Do they need a feature back? Yes, but I don't think they need to go fishing with picks for a back. This is a passing team as long as Rodgers is here. Green is a pass orientated, 3rd down back. Samwise Gamgee sure looked impressive but it's hard to get a feel to how he'll hold up week in and week out. Right now he's the closest thing to a feature back on this team.

Screw Benson and Starks, shouldn't even be in the equation anymore.

Both good comments. I too would not mine seeing Benson and Stark go. As for o-line vs Running Back, go with the position which has the BPA after the 1st round. As much as I hate to say this: da trenches > RB, and the first round should be reserved for the O-line. JMO.

We need a QB in round 1.

Tequila_Monster 73
Timesfour 0

quote:

Originally posted by PackerRuss:
I'm all about upgrading the lines, and upgrading everywhere we can, but your point was a WR or athletic TE in Rds 1-3, and TT has lost his way. My point is I don't see that being the case, since he'll want to continue to restock the offensive weapons. Now, if there is a similar grade between an ILB and a TE in Rd 2, of course you go with the "need". But single handedly saying if TT takes a WR/TE in Rd 1-3 TT is lost, I just don't agree with.

I wouldn't freak out so much if they took a WR or TE in the 3rd, and I could live with a TE in the first two so long as he also is a great blocker. But a WR in the first two? That would be a disaster, no matter how you want to dress it up. It would be only slightly less idiotic than taking a QB. It would demonstrate a clean break from the reality of the problems facing this team.

quote:

It would demonstrate a clean break from the reality of the problems facing this team.

I don't know. I've been learning a lot from the NRA lately. Apparently the answer to lessening gun violence is for everyone to have more guns. So likewise, the answer to lessening QB sacks and improving the OL must be to have more WRs!

The two key questions for me on the o-line are what do you do with Lang and Bulaga. Those are your #2 and #3 guys on the on-line behind Sitton, and they can play a few different positions.

I had thought I'd read somewhere that Green Bay was considering moving Lang to center. If Lang can play Center, I think that helps this team tremendously.

For Bulaga, the big question is whether to move an effective RT to LT. I'd hesitate to do so because you potentially harm two positions if he can't make the transition.

My ideal line for next year would be:

LT: Sherrod
LG: Barclay
C: Lang
RG: Sitton
RT: Bulaga

Newhouse could be the back-up LT, Barclay the back-up RT, and EDS can be the back-up Center with Lang returning to Guard if there our injuries.

That would take the pressure off selecting a center in the first couple of rounds. I'd prefer those selections go towards D-line (where I think we're thin with Pickett's age and Worthy's injury), safety, WR, or TE.

I'd be disappointed if they go RB early...

quote:

For Bulaga, the big question is whether to move an effective RT to LT. I'd hesitate to do so because you potentially harm two positions if he can't make the transition.

There seems to be a lot of talk assuming Bulaga could be shifted to LT but isn't the guy's arms too short for that position? Though certainly not dominant, Newhouse improved this year so maybe he can take another step this offseason and be good enough at LT.

Didn't Bulaga play his junior and senior years at Iowa at LT?

Bulaga's arms a quarter inch longer than Clifton's. He got the job done for the most part.

quote:

Disagree. If Buluga makes the switch to LT and Newhouse to RT, they will be fine. I personally believe Newhouse can get even better. Also not ruling out what Sherrod brings to the table. The tackle position is what really took a hit injury wise this year yet it was the Center position that was the true liability.

This

Newhouse may never be Johnathan Odgen or Joe Thomas but I think he played above average this year and the important factor is he continues to improve. Josh Sitton is one of the best guards in the NFC and Bulaga is consistently good. What killed us this year was the center position issues and musical chairs due to injuries.

In retrospect, Saturday was the wrong move but it is what it is. I'm not quite ready to throw in the towel on EDS either and the good news with the injuries is that they found a guy (Barclay) that is solid and gives them more options on the OL. If, and it's a big if, Sherrod comes back that's almost like another draft pick.

I just don't see TT taking another OL high in the draft unless there's a slam dunk player there. Where I do think he may lean is DL - especially when we look at the fact Raji could leave via FA and Pickett is up in years. I like what Neal showed us but Worthy was up and down (and hurt) and Daniels for all of his motor and effort isn't the answer either. If they can add another space eater and Perry comes back healthy I think the D should be improved.

Obviously I'd love if they could add another run stuffer at LB and another WR or TE but Thompson seems to like taking DL early in the draft if they are available.

Frankly, I don't think Bulaga's play before his injury was especially stellar.

Bulaga was playing through a knee injury before the AZ game. His name popped up on a few injury reports before the hip gave out. I have to think his knee was bothering him more than we knew. At least I hope that was the case.

Bulaga was banged up even before he went out for the year.

If he's healthy, I don't worry about him. The jury is still out on Sherrod, obviously.

The biggest hole on the OL is center, so that's should be one of the main focuses in the first 3 rounds.

I don't support moving Bulaga to LT.

If Sherrod can't at least push if not beat out Newhouse, then you may have start looking again.

I'll also be curious to see how Datko has progressed.

Bulaga should be kept at RT. Hope Datko can get some playing time cuz I just don't think Sherrod will be healthy enough to play this year...or if he ever will, sad to say. If a OL is drafted in the 1st 3 rounds it will be telling.

Everyone seems ok with Lang, but I thought he was pretty poor this year. I want to say we're set at LG with him but I just didn't see it on the field this year.

They just need more talent on the o-line. Draft an interior OL high (either center or guard) and let them duke it out. If we have a starting caliber lineman on the bench.....GREAT! Bulaga, Clifton, Lang, Sherrod and Sitton have all missd games the last 2 years, so the idea of only needing 5 starting caliber guys is wrong. Other than Sitton, I don't see a position on the o-line that we can't upgrade. Newhouse, Bulaga, Sherrod, Lang and EDS haven't proven to be difference makers, so keep bringing guys in until we have an o-line like the 49ers.

I mean, can you imagine this offense if AR can hold the ball for 5 seconds in the pocket without worrying about getting hit? Or if the o-line opened holes that even I could pick up 4 yards? It wouldn't matter who player WR, TE or RB, they'd be one of the best ever. Make it happen TT, make it happen.

quote:

Super Bowl Means Round 1 Complete
gnb.scout.com

With the Super Bowl in the books, the first-round draft order is complete.

The Green Bay Packers own the 26th pick of the first round. Because the Packers and Seattle Seahawks finished with 11-5 records and lost in the divisional round of the playoffs, they will alternate 25th and 26th picks in each round. In the second round, the Packers would pick 25th (and Seattle 26th) but instead will pick 23rd because Cleveland gave up its selection for selecting Josh Gordon in the second round of the Supplemental Draft and New Orleans lost its choice because of the Bountygate scandal. continue

Gee, shouldn't the Packers always be ahead of the Seahags because of the "Fail Mary"?

quote:

Originally posted by AZPackerBacker:
Gee, shouldn't the Packers always be ahead of the Seahags because of the "Fail Mary"?

So true!!!! The NFL can't hook the Packers up enough after that epic fail.