Rusty posted:An Opie Whizburger sounds delicious. Are they gluten free?
I'm pretty sure you could find shredded tires in there if that's considered gluten free.
Yeah, But Herschal was ranting about a position player.
You went on and on about a ****ing punter.
Grave Digger posted:Draft a starter vs a backup. I’d rather have an instant starter over a definite backup. David Bakhtiari and Josh Sitton weren’t sitting at this draft slot, I like Scott’s potential over everyone else’s. Sounds like Gute does too.
A bad punter can cause as many problems as a bad backup RT.
Okay, so I'm not done. He isn't an instant starter. How fickle is the punter position? He is very likely the starter but if Vogel beats him out and they keep him because of the draft pick, well, that ****ing sucks. If that's the path then let's suffer along with Opie Whizburger until he improves because screw that 2 punter crap again.
antooo posted:Yeah, But Herschal was ranting about a position player.
You went on and on about a ****ing punter.
So, low lying fruit?
He better be their next Craig Hentrich (that they actually keep).
Why isn’t he an instant starter? Unless he completely melts down or suffers amnesia, at worst you’re getting an improvement over every punter we’ve had since we let Jon Ryan walk. Scott isn’t some big leg developmental UDFA, he’s a polished big leg that has consistently demonstrated great accuracy and power.
Also, let's see how he holds up under NFL pressure first.
I knew I saw that face before.
Henry posted:Rusty posted:Am I ecstatic over the pick? No. I audibly guffawed when the tracker updated. However, I cannot and will not speculate on the opportunity cost of this pick until actual pads go on. The facts, however, are this:
- He was not taken in Rounds 1-3
- The Packers did not trade up to get him
- He was not selected at the expense of an obvious can't miss player (unless you put Deon Cain in that category, but they already took a WR)
For these reasons, I with withhold any outrage and panic until meaningful football happens. Meantime, I'll pull up a spot on the couch and watch.
Well I'm laid up in pain for the last three days. I'm gonna bitch like a 3 year old and have Pakrz make me a sandwich.
Opie Whizburger moniker is branded and trademarked.
I had a steroid injection in my back Thursday afternoon, and they blew apart a cyst pressing up against my spine. I'll pass ya a Vicodin.
If he can punt 'em like he did in college he becomes a weapon.
You Sherlocked the **** out of that one didn't you.
At least he's a fairly fast punter. 4.81 40 time isn't too bad for that position. 
Hope the kid turns into an All-Pro and becomes a field-flipping, goal-line pinning weapon at a position we won't have to worry about for the next 10-15 years.
Henry posted:I'm gonna bitch like a 3 year old and have Pakrz make me a sandwich.
How is this any different than normal?
ChilliJon posted:CAPackFan95 posted:We had a good punter. Thompson chose to let him walk.
This. This. And once again. This.
Jon Ryan was under contract for minimum salary. They didn't let him walk in free agency, they cut him outright. I think TT decided to cut Jon Ryan when he had that terrible game in the wind in Chicago in 2007.
Special teams better be balls to the walls this year.
Henry posted:I'm happy for him. Try not sucking up a 5th round pick at your lake house.
My in-laws have a cabin near Hayward. I'll keep an eye on "Great Scott".
MichiganPacker2 posted:ChilliJon posted:CAPackFan95 posted:We had a good punter. Thompson chose to let him walk.
This. This. And once again. This.
Jon Ryan was under contract for minimum salary. They didn't let him walk in free agency, they cut him outright. I think TT decided to cut Jon Ryan when he had that terrible game in the wind in Chicago in 2007.
Even worse!
First two rounds, he looks like a genius. Then he goes all Sherman on us.
Grave Digger posted:Draft a starter vs a backup. I’d rather have an instant starter over a definite backup. David Bakhtiari and Josh Sitton weren’t sitting at this draft slot, I like Scott’s potential over everyone else’s. Sounds like Gute does too.
A bad punter can cause as many problems as a bad backup RT.
I just saw this. A bad punter can cause as many problems as a backup RT? You sure you want to run with that? That is the ****ing stupidest thing I've heard in a long time.
"Oh ****, we've got bad field position"
"Oh ****, they have to fish Rodgers' arm out of his asshole again. That duck interception sure looked awesome though. We better get that punting situation addressed!"
Tell me, how did Vogel do last year?
Vogel sets team net punting record.
That's how he did, as a rookie. This pick looks even dumber a day removed.
vitaflo posted:Henry posted:BJ Sander, cannon leg, instant starter.
Oh, and turf management Ph.D or something.
Sander started in college for only 1 year. Scott started for 4 and had better numbers across all of them. If you're going to rip the pick, try a little harder.
Just saw this too. Did you read the thread? Do you actually think I care about other kicker's stats? How’s this then. Is Vogel that bad as a ROOKIE that it would warrant this pick over a rush backer or OL to protect Rodgers? The rookie who currently holds team net yardage record is somehow so completely unacceptable that taking a OL or OLB is out of the question?
I am sure Opie Whizburger will get all the excuses and time to develop vs a UDFA rookie who was more than satisfactory. This instant starter **** is ridiculous or should I not use BJ Sander here as an example?
Opie Whizburger better be nailing 60 yard punts that lodge into the one yard line like a javelin.
**** your try harder. Oh wait, Ray Guy.
5th round seems high for a punter but really anything after the 4th round is a roll of the dice anyways, so why not go with a punter you think could solidify the position for the next 5+ years. And it was three picks away from being a 6th round pick, so are we really saying that this is a great pick if TT moves down 3 picks?
All depends on if the guy can punt. If he becomes a top 10 punter, great pick. If not, it's a crap pick. No different than any other position.
Because you've got a punter with no real issues and it was only his rookie year. As far as picks in the 5th, Rush backer, flip of the coin. Oline, pretty damn good track record even as rotation.
Like you said, if the pick pans out for an extended period of time, great move. Everyone is aware of what field position can do for a team. OLB is at a serious deficit and Oline should never be a question with Rodgers back there.
Seems pretty cavalier. Opie Whizburger can have his spot as long as Gerkenberken makes sure the depth on oline is acceptable.
NEVER understood the overwhelming sentiment that drafting a specialist is stupid. If you can get a guy that you are sure is better than what you have , not "he could be in the mix", not "with some experience", not "he has potential to be" why not?
FLPACKER posted:NEVER understood the overwhelming sentiment that drafting a specialist is stupid. If you can get a guy that you are sure is better than what you have , not "he could be in the mix", not "with some experience", not "he has potential to be" why not?
Because you have a decent punter already. It has nothing to do with aversion to drafting specialists, it has to do with areas seriously lacking in depth that are more important especially when you have someone in the position who doesn't suck.
And let me add, this "sure is better" and "instant starter" is crap. Well, the Packers are already calling it competition unless they are just flat out bull****ting. Seriously, what if Vogel beats Opie out? Will they pull the trigger and kick him to the curb? That's the real test right there.
I mean, I hope he is awsum, but I'd have rather gone ten different ways with this pick
I think that with a specific skill such as punting, it is easier to get a comparison. For example what if; they evaluated every punt from his career at Alabama and found that 90% of them went 4 yards farther & were in the air .4 seconds longer than 90% of Vogel's punts, & he was as successful or better when needing to place the ball inside the 20 yard line ..... you can be more certain he is better than when evaluating another position from college to pros. The analytics that they have on how this affects games is far more insightful than we know & I am sure justifies the pick?
Think he'll have to end up being a significant upgrade at the position to justify the pick.
Exactly. If Opie crushes it, I am a happy goat. If the right side of the line collapses, I don't care if he can kick it to the Moon.
FLPACKER posted:I think that with a specific skill such as punting, it is easier to get a comparison. For example what if; they evaluated every punt from his career at Alabama and found that 90% of them went 4 yards farther & were in the air .4 seconds longer than 90% of Vogel's punts, & he was as successful or better when needing to place the ball inside the 20 yard line ..... you can be more certain he is better than when evaluating another position from college to pros. The analytics that they have on how this affects games is far more insightful than we know & I am sure justifies the pick?
I get it. I get past performance, stats can all make it look like a logical pick. In any other circumstance like a full rebuild or luxury pick, great. But as MJ said it would need to be a significant upgrade for them to overlook true need positions.
The BJ Sander reference is just that. A guy who was "instant starter" and **** the bed because he couldn't handle the NFL. The sample of one isn't necessarily fair to Opie but pointing out kickers easily get the yips shows there is no guarantee this kid is ironclad.
The thing that gets me even more is Vogel was a rookie last year. Why wouldn't it be reasonable to assume he's going to improve even more? You're either flat out throwing away a pick or using that resource to get a punter whose somewhat better.
Opie better be killin' it.
Henry - I get your angst with the pick. Has the potential to be a historically bad pick. But you seem to be under the assumption that whoever may have been available in the fifth round would somehow:
make the team
add depth
have an impact
somehow stop AR from getting injured
i get that Vogel was at least adequate last year, if not much better than adequate. But even if the Packers found another Sitton or Linley in the later rounds, there’s no guarantee the player even sees the field this season. If the Packers were really concerned about the O line, they would’ve drafted that position with one of the first couple of picks. Those are the rounds that usually add instant depth/starters. Clearly, Gute felt other areas of the roster were more important to upgrade. And I believe he didn’t think the players available that he wanted on the roster would justify a 5th round pick. Aren’t most on this board all about BPA?
As I said in another post: I’m not too concerned about the Vikings as it’s onlt April. And I’m not too concerned about the Packers depth because, well, it’s April.
No late 5th round pick has been historically bad. Not possible, by definition.
Alexander=Carroll
Scott=Sander
Good stuff early.
Outside of historically bad, that is a great post PACKLANDVA.
