Last year, it was the WRs...

[Scott4Pack]

...that our GM didn’t add to. It was a position group that probably all of us said needed improvement. The idea was that GB would draft a WR or acquire a FA to instill a WR2 at the very least. Excuse me if I’m wrong, but almost nobody said the WR group was going to be good enough in 2020. But now that 2020 is over, we saw that they were good enough. In fact, they exceeded expectations.

So, I wonder if there’s a group this year that the same thing could happen. What group would that be?

OLine
DLine
LBs
DBs
RBs/TEs
WRs (again)
Please do not say QBs
Say STs if you must

[Scott4Pack]

First, the OLine. We lost Wagner. It seems to be common sense that we draft a OLineman high in the draft. But I don’t know if I see people saying that it’ll need to improve over what it could be.

The DLine might be considered. Two guys (Lancaster and Lowry) are not special and seem more suited as backups than starters.

The LBs seem a logical candidate. Preston might be gone or declining. The ILBs are decent but have their limitations.

The RBs could potentially lose two guys. But we’d be discussing next year’s expectations against unknowns.

The WRs could potentially move up again, but it’d take another step from guys like Lazard and ESQ.

The DBs still have King, but not much else behind Jaire.

We could hope and pray for STs to improve. But again, they depend upon reserves primarily. So it’s hard to pick this group.

[go pak go]

I think CB, DL and OL have the greatest opportunity to be liabilities in 2021.

Kevin King is not a Packer as he is a UFA.

I think OL chugging along will surprise people the least. I think the CB group has the chance to be the "surprise group" with guys like Josh Jackson, Chandon Sullivan, Ento and Samuals stepping up we don't add to it. I expect CBs will be the group Packers fans will wring hand the most come May.

[TheSkeptic]

I think CB, DL and OL have the greatest opportunity to be liabilities in 2021.

Kevin King is not a Packer as he is a UFA.

I think OL chugging along will surprise people the least. I think the CB group has the chance to be the "surprise group" with guys like Josh Jackson, Chandon Sullivan, Ento and Samuals stepping up we don't add to it. I expect CBs will be the group Packers fans will wring hand the most come May.

It is unlikely that Bak can start to open the season so what we really have is a very good Oline in November and a not very good Oline in September. As much as I would like to see Linsley resigned I don't think the cap permits it. Almost have to draft an OT in the 1st 3 rounds and hope that he can start at LT in September. That is not unreasonable as both Bak and Linsley did it and neither were 1st round picks.

Almost have to draft a CB in the 1st 3 rounds and hope he can start in September too. That is not unreasonable either, many rookies have done it.

[YoHoChecko]

It is unlikely that Bak can start to open the season so what we really have is a very good Oline in November and a not very good Oline in September. As much as I would like to see Linsley resigned I don't think the cap permits it. Almost have to draft an OT in the 1st 3 rounds and hope that he can start at LT in September. That is not unreasonable as both Bak and Linsley did it and neither were 1st round picks.

Almost have to draft a CB in the 1st 3 rounds and hope he can start in September too. That is not unreasonable either, many rookies have done it.

I don't get this; an ACL tear could take up to a year to heal but that's rare these days. 8-9 months puts him ready to return in August or September. I'd imagine we wouldn't start a rookie there; we'd probably have Turner or Jenkins sub in for a couple weeks if needbe. I'm not super concerned about OT.

[NCF]

I'm not super concerned about OT.

I am longer-term, but yeah, not overly concerned in 2021.

[YoHoChecko]

I'm not super concerned about OT.

I am longer-term, but yeah, not overly concerned in 2021.

Oh sure, we need to draft the C and RT of the future in this draft. Not necessarily early, but we should get those players on our roster.

But I'm not drafting differently because Bakh's knee fell apart in December

[Labrev]

The thing about WR last year is they would have taken Aiyuk if he was there. When he was not, they just did not like the value of WR at any point afterwards. Point is, sometimes they plan to address a position in the draft, but it just doesn't work out.

I would not be surprised if something like that happens at DL. I am sure they would like another good DT body, but if they do not get one early, I do not see much point in drafting one until the late rounds. This is a pretty lousy DL class from what I've heard. If you are not getting a stud early, then I would not waste a Day 2 or early Day 3 pick on a role player (i.e. a guy who is good against the run but poor against the pass or vice-versa, or just okay at both). Guys like that can be had late or even in UDFA.

And I also do not see much point in getting a raw developmental guy in the mids because we already have that in Keke, and this is about the time to be getting a return on that investment. Guys like that do not really contribute in Year 1, and we need guys who will contribute fairly soon.

Apart from that, what we have is not bad. Clark is a stud, Lancaster is a decent run-defender, Keke is decent against the pass (hopefully takes another step in run defense), Adams on a prove-it deal and in a 1-gap scheme could surprise (I would not pay him afterwards, though). Even Lowry might improve in the new defense. Similarly, we got a good year out of what we had at WR because LaFleur's offense did not ask as much of them as Mac's.

Don't get me wrong, I think a stud DL next to Clark would help out a lot. I just wouldn't be surprised if we decide to go with what we've got, though.

[Labrev]

As for the other positions:

OLine -- nope, we always address OL. Next?
DLine -- quite plausible, see above.
LBs -- also quite plausible, we have neglected ILB with less than we have now.
DBs -- no way, I cannot fathom that CB is not a hard need in their eyes even if they were to bring back King.
RBs/TEs -- I will be surprised if we do not take a RB after losing at least one of Jones or Williams. I wouldn't bother at TE
WRs (again) -- we can't do that again, not with the impending free-agencies at this position.

[Ghost_Lombardi]

The WR group has problems. The biggest two are drops and an inability to separate quickly at the LOS. The drops don't need any more discussion. The only WR we have who can win at the LOS is Adams. We do not have a true slot WR and Adams is far too valuable to move inside on a consistent basis.

That doesn't mean it is a bad group, but I don't really think the WR group exceeded expectations.

[lupedafiasco]

My order would be:

OT- Bak probably missed the first month of the season. You’ve gotta think now only does he need to recover from the ACL but also get into game shape. Sure he’s rehabbing but that isn’t the same. On the right side we really could improve over Turder.
DT- It doesn’t matter who you bring in as ILB if we can’t win up front. Clark needs help inside. If he’s out for an extended time or we wear him down we have very little to offer inside.
CB- The Packers don’t need a #1 CB so I don’t think CB is as dire a need as most think. I expect a top 3 draft pick and a FA pickup to supplement this group. It will improve as losing King is addition by subtraction.
ILB- Barnes was ok. Martin was ok. A year of real camp will do them good if we get it. Adding competition to this group will bring the best out of them.
RB- I expect both Jones and Williams to be gone. That leaves us with Dillon in an oft injured position.
WR- I said it last year and I’ll say it again. THE PACKERS DO NOT NEED A #1 RECEIVER! They have that in Adams. The scheme gets these guys open well enough. They need to get some guys to start developing though. They should have gotten one last year in a later round to at least start working on. This year they really need to start getting guys ready when we move on from the inconsistencies of the FA to be WRs.

[YoHoChecko]

My order would be:

OT- Bak probably missed the first month of the season. You’ve gotta think now only does he need to recover from the ACL but also get into game shape. Sure he’s rehabbing but that isn’t the same. On the right side we really could improve over Turder.
DT- It doesn’t matter who you bring in as ILB if we can’t win up front. Clark needs help inside. If he’s out for an extended time or we wear him down we have very little to offer inside.
CB- The Packers don’t need a #1 CB so I don’t think CB is as dire a need as most think. I expect a top 3 draft pick and a FA pickup to supplement this group. It will improve as losing King is addition by subtraction.
ILB- Barnes was ok. Martin was ok. A year of real camp will do them good if we get it. Adding competition to this group will bring the best out of them.
RB- I expect both Jones and Williams to be gone. That leaves us with Dillon in an oft injured position.
WR- I said it last year and I’ll say it again. THE PACKERS DO NOT NEED A #1 RECEIVER! They have that in Adams. The scheme gets these guys open well enough. They need to get some guys to start developing though. They should have gotten one last year in a later round to at least start working on. This year they really need to start getting guys ready when we move on from the inconsistencies of the FA to be WRs.

I agree with all of this except OT. I think we're perfectly set for starters at OT in 2021 and mostly need a depth piece that can challenge for swing OT and take over RT in 2022.

[Drj820]

Were they good enough? They were great against bad defenses. Lafleur did a great job of scheming the boys open most of the year. But i think everybody expected the offense to be good enough to make the playoffs. It was in the playoffs that everything would be decided in terms of if the roster was good enough.

In that game MVS was surprisingly good enough
Adams was not good enough, but I will excuse him due to being good enough all season long and helping us get to the top seed

The rest of the WRs were so non existent that Rodgers had to look at Marcedes Lewis 3 times.

A WR3 or 4 who could have made the bucs secondary think about needing to cover him sure would have been nice.

Our first round pick did not dress, our second round pick who was destined to be "made for January at Lambeau" got three carries, 3rd round pick tore his ACL, 4th round pick was traded for our first round pick who didn't dress, and nobody else drafted played either.

The roster proved to be good enough due to great health and good coaching and good play to get to the NFC championship game, it did not prove to be good enough to overcome bad play and bad coaching.

Who knows, maybe if ONE persons drafted in 2020 could have been useful in the game, the roster could have been good enough to overcome some bad performances and bad coaching. But alas...it was not.

[Drj820]

The thing about WR last year is they would have taken Aiyuk if he was there. When he was not, they just did not like the value of WR at any point afterwards. Point is, sometimes they plan to address a position in the draft, but it just doesn't work out.

I would not be surprised if something like that happens at DL. I am sure they would like another good DT body, but if they do not get one early, I do not see much point in drafting one until the late rounds. This is a pretty lousy DL class from what I've heard. If you are not getting a stud early, then I would not waste a Day 2 or early Day 3 pick on a role player (i.e. a guy who is good against the run but poor against the pass or vice-versa, or just okay at both). Guys like that can be had late or even in UDFA.

And I also do not see much point in getting a raw developmental guy in the mids because we already have that in Keke, and this is about the time to be getting a return on that investment. Guys like that do not really contribute in Year 1, and we need guys who will contribute fairly soon.

Apart from that, what we have is not bad. Clark is a stud, Lancaster is a decent run-defender, Keke is decent against the pass (hopefully takes another step in run defense), Adams on a prove-it deal and in a 1-gap scheme could surprise (I would not pay him afterwards, though). Even Lowry might improve in the new defense. Similarly, we got a good year out of what we had at WR because LaFleur's offense did not ask as much of them as Mac's.

Don't get me wrong, I think a stud DL next to Clark would help out a lot. I just wouldn't be surprised if we decide to go with what we've got, though.

We nuked our 4th round pick to move up and get love. Wish we had nuked our 4th round pick or even just our 3rd to go get Aiyuk.

[lupedafiasco]

Were they good enough? They were great against bad defenses. Lafleur did a great job of scheming the boys open most of the year. But i think everybody expected the offense to be good enough to make the playoffs. It was in the playoffs that everything would be decided in terms of if the roster was good enough.

In that game MVS was surprisingly good enough
Adams was not good enough, but I will excuse him due to being good enough all season long and helping us get to the top seed

The rest of the WRs were so non existent that Rodgers had to look at Marcedes Lewis 3 times.

A WR3 or 4 who could have made the bucs secondary think about needing to cover him sure would have been nice.

Our first round pick did not dress, our second round pick who was destined to be "made for January at Lambeau" got three carries, 3rd round pick tore his ACL, 4th round pick was traded for our first round pick who didn't dress, and nobody else drafted played either.

The roster proved to be good enough due to great health and good coaching and good play to get to the NFC championship game, it did not prove to be good enough to overcome bad play and bad coaching.

Who knows, maybe if ONE persons drafted in 2020 could have been useful in the game, the roster could have been good enough to overcome some bad performances and bad coaching. But alas...it was not.

Rodgers was under siege by in that game. Better tackle play and that offense does fine moving the ball. The receivers in that game didn’t execute. It didn’t matter how good or bad they were. Adams dropped a ball and didn’t drag his feet on another. Lazard wasn’t looking for a ball one time and didnt set a pick correctly on another. As you said MVS played well. They’ve got enough weapons to work with this scheme. Gotta do a better job up front. Let’s not forget they were dominated in the trenches trying to run the ball as well.

[Drj820]

Were they good enough? They were great against bad defenses. Lafleur did a great job of scheming the boys open most of the year. But i think everybody expected the offense to be good enough to make the playoffs. It was in the playoffs that everything would be decided in terms of if the roster was good enough.

In that game MVS was surprisingly good enough
Adams was not good enough, but I will excuse him due to being good enough all season long and helping us get to the top seed

The rest of the WRs were so non existent that Rodgers had to look at Marcedes Lewis 3 times.

A WR3 or 4 who could have made the bucs secondary think about needing to cover him sure would have been nice.

Our first round pick did not dress, our second round pick who was destined to be "made for January at Lambeau" got three carries, 3rd round pick tore his ACL, 4th round pick was traded for our first round pick who didn't dress, and nobody else drafted played either.

The roster proved to be good enough due to great health and good coaching and good play to get to the NFC championship game, it did not prove to be good enough to overcome bad play and bad coaching.

Who knows, maybe if ONE persons drafted in 2020 could have been useful in the game, the roster could have been good enough to overcome some bad performances and bad coaching. But alas...it was not.

Rodgers was under siege by in that game. Better tackle play and that offense does fine moving the ball. The receivers in that game didn’t execute. It didn’t matter how good or bad they were. Adams dropped a ball and didn’t drag his feet on another. Lazard wasn’t looking for a ball one time and didnt set a pick correctly on another. As you said MVS played well. They’ve got enough weapons to work with this scheme. Gotta do a better job up front. Let’s not forget they were dominated in the trenches trying to run the ball as well.

I dont disagree at all that the game was lost in the trenches. I just hear that we did not have anyone graded high enough to take at our original draft position at the WR position...and that is what i disagree with. We could have been aggressive and moved up for a Jefferson or Aiyuk (probably only two in reach), or we could have stayed where we were or even moved back a couple slots and drafted Michael Pittman Jr or Shenault...two guys I believe could have helped us move the ball in the fourth quarter against the bucs. 2 guys that would both have helped St Brown never see the field in that game.

edit: even though i forgot about him when thinking of Pittman and Shenault...Tee Higgins could be added to this list too.

[lupedafiasco]

Yeah I feel you on that one. They could have traded up and taken a punter and it would have been more useful.

[Yoop]

I mention this kind of stuff and I get put on probation we've needed a slot receiver since Cobb left, why is it Rodgers one of the best to ever play, and the savior year after year to get us to the playoffs gets a bunch of mid round or UDFA receivers to play with, there are people in this forum that blame him as part of this loss, if only he had ran it in, if only he had seen this other receiver that was open.

the love pick and lack of a receiver taken seemed like punishment for Rodgers complaining the year prior, Guty sure showed him who's boss. insanity.

[lupedafiasco]

I mention this kind of stuff and I get put on probation we've needed a slot receiver since Cobb left, why is it Rodgers one of the best to ever play, and the savior year after year to get us to the playoffs gets a bunch of mid round or UDFA receivers to play with, there are people in this forum that blame him as part of this loss, if only he had ran it in, if only he had seen this other receiver that was open.

the love pick and lack of a receiver taken seemed like punishment for Rodgers complaining the year prior, Guty sure showed him who's boss. insanity.

I truly believe the Love pick was Gutey trying to come out of the shadow of his predecessors. Wolf got Favre. TT got Rodgers. Gutey thought Rodgers was done because he played above average with a poor supporting cast in the 1st year of brand new offense. He didnt have the foresight to think maybe Rodgers and the offense would improve with another year under its belt. I think it was MM, and Ive heard it from other coaches and GMs, that it takes 2 years to successfully install a scheme. Just a man and his ego.

You can have the balls to take a QB but it only matter if he shows up. IMO if youre giving up on your QB the next one needs to be better before you decide to move on and I find it hard to believe the next QB is going to be better than the best of all time.

[RingoCStarrQB]

I mention this kind of stuff and I get put on probation we've needed a slot receiver since Cobb left, why is it Rodgers one of the best to ever play, and the savior year after year to get us to the playoffs gets a bunch of mid round or UDFA receivers to play with, there are people in this forum that blame him as part of this loss, if only he had ran it in, if only he had seen this other receiver that was open.

the love pick and lack of a receiver taken seemed like punishment for Rodgers complaining the year prior, Guty sure showed him who's boss. insanity.

I truly believe the Love pick was Gutey trying to come out of the shadow of his predecessors. Wolf got Favre. TT got Rodgers. Gutey thought Rodgers was done because he played above average with a poor supporting cast in the 1st year of brand new offense. He didnt have the foresight to think maybe Rodgers and the offense would improve with another year under its belt. I think it was MM, and Ive heard it from other coaches and GMs, that it takes 2 years to successfully install a scheme. Just a man and his ego.

You can have the balls to take a QB but it only matter if he shows up. IMO if youre giving up on your QB the next one needs to be better before you decide to move on and I find it hard to believe the next QB is going to be better than the best of all time.

Sorry, the greatest Packers QB of all time is still Bart Starr. 5 NFL championships combined with clutch plays in the biggest games, including 2 Super Bowl MVPs and one NFL MVP. Looking back with admittedly 2020 hindsight, I would have rather had Bart Starr under center on 3rd and goal from the 8 yard line at the north endzone end of the field in the 2020 NFC Championship Game.

It is what it is and it was what it was. It is what is isn't and it was what it wasn't.