From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
That is NOT a fact. That's an opinion on what the draftniks thought. To determine if that was fact or not, we would need to see all 32 NFL boards. If several teams had Leatherwood around where the Raiders did, then the reach label can not be applied. If no other team had Leatherwood in the first round then we could definitely apply the reach label. UNFORTUNATELY, we will NEVER know these things for a fact.
read YoHos post. You are arguing as if "reach" has one precise exact definition. Reach can mean "based off the GMs board". or can easily be used to discuss a narrative based off talking heads consensus and narrative.
The term reach can be used for both conversations.
I agree, read my post above for other thoughts on that.
I dont see bust being apart of this though. I think it can be immedietely discussed if someone is a "reach". The criteria for the discussion just is either based off whether the GM grabbed someone earlier than they needed to, or if someone was drafted way before the talking heads had them slated to go.
Back to Leatherwood who had an average big board position of around 60...its completely within the definition and has nothing to do with bust to say "Wow the raiders reached!"
That comment also has nothing to do the Raiders or other GMs actual big board. Its just sports guys talking with sports guys about the opinions of talking heads and gas bags.
So Leatherwood was, in fact, a "reach", without even needing to know what the Raiders thought of him.
That is NOT a fact. That's an opinion on what the draftniks thought. To determine if that was fact or not, we would need to see all 32 NFL boards. If several teams had Leatherwood around where the Raiders did, then the reach label can not be applied. If no other team had Leatherwood in the first round then we could definitely apply the reach label. UNFORTUNATELY, we will NEVER know these things for a fact.
read YoHos post. You are arguing as if "reach" has one precise exact definition. Reach can mean "based off the GMs board". or can easily be used to discuss a narrative based off talking heads consensus and narrative.
The term reach can be used for both conversations.
no kidding now where not allowed to call a pick a reach, because we can't prove it till the player busts out 3 years later, or however long it takes for the GM to admit he screwed up and cuts the guy, some last there whole rookie contract.
I don't know anyone that didn't consider Savage a reach when Gute jumped up to slot 21 for him 3 years ago, at least till they saw him play, I don't know many that thought Love had a first round grade, GM's reach for players all the time, and Draftniks point it out.
read YoHos post. You are arguing as if "reach" has one precise exact definition. Reach can mean "based off the GMs board". or can easily be used to discuss a narrative based off talking heads consensus and narrative.
The term reach can be used for both conversations.
I agree, read my post above for other thoughts on that.
I dont see bust being apart of this though. I think it can be immedietely discussed if someone is a "reach". The criteria for the discussion just is either based off whether the GM grabbed someone earlier than they needed to, or if someone was drafted way before the talking heads had them slated to go.
Back to Leatherwood who had an average big board position of around 60...its completely within the definition and has nothing to do with bust to say "Wow the raiders reached!"
That comment also has nothing to do the Raiders or other GMs actual big board. Its just sports guys talking with sports guys about the opinions of talking heads and gas bags.
"reach" is the appropriate term for both convos.
You are not lumping bust in there, no. I also agree that reach is appropriate for both conversations. Never said it wasn't.
We will never truly know if a GM took a player before they needed to, but this would be the only way to determine a true reach.
We can definitely discuss a reach in the context of draftnik opinion. We should all just realize that the draftniks may be incorrect in their evaluation and the actual GM boards, plural, may have the player slated higher. Question the value, definitely. Yoho's post exemplifies what I am thinking, better than I can write it up.
The problem ends up coming to a head when there is complaining about a player or GM because we hold the draftnik opinion as truth. See a specific poster still complaining about Rashan Gary as a reach.
Last edited by Pckfn23 on 14 Apr 2022 10:29, edited 1 time in total.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
That is NOT a fact. That's an opinion on what the draftniks thought. To determine if that was fact or not, we would need to see all 32 NFL boards. If several teams had Leatherwood around where the Raiders did, then the reach label can not be applied. If no other team had Leatherwood in the first round then we could definitely apply the reach label. UNFORTUNATELY, we will NEVER know these things for a fact.
read YoHos post. You are arguing as if "reach" has one precise exact definition. Reach can mean "based off the GMs board". or can easily be used to discuss a narrative based off talking heads consensus and narrative.
The term reach can be used for both conversations.
no kidding now where not allowed to call a pick a reach, because we can't prove it till the player busts out 3 years later, or however long it takes for the GM to admit he screwed up and cuts the guy, some last there whole rookie contract.
It was NEVER said that we can't call a pick a reach... "Have an opinion all you want, but don't be so arrogant to not realize your opinion might be different than what the NFL GMs thought." What happens 1, 2, or 3 years later is irrelevant to the conversation about reach! You are STILL confusing reach and bust. Reach is "determined" by draftniks on draft night, well before the player EVER hits the field.
I don't know anyone that didn't consider Savage a reach when Gute jumped up to slot 21 for him 3 years ago, at least till they saw him play, I don't know many that thought Love had a first round grade, GM's reach for players all the time, and Draftniks point it out.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
Not even close, just need to understand it is an opinion, your opinion, maybe even a well accepted opinion by many, but it is just that opinion.
We do KNOW, that no NFL GM's like Brian Brohm in the top 60 or wherever he went, despite a public consensus he could be a top 10 pick. We also know no NFL GM"s like DK Metcalf in the top 60, or whatever again.
You can have the opinion Alex Leatherwood was a reach at 17, based off your feelings and public consensus, but it is possibly every single GM in league had a top 20 grade on him, so that part we just don't know and can not know. Same as you can say you didn't like the value of Gary at 12 or thought we could get him later, but we have no idea where the other 31 GM's had him, could be possible no other team in the league liked him in the 1st, then he could be considered a reach, but we aren't privy to that knowledge.
Rashan Gary was a reach, imagine if every player a team takes sits for two years of there rookie contract, or simply just sucks for the first two years ( your choice, suck or sit is the same thing) your team would be named the DEtroit Lions or Cinnci, or Miami.
anyone that thinks drafting high picks to groom in this age of UFA will struggle to field a winning team, this aint the middle ages, I was serious the other day that Gary will be a difficult resign, in that sense we lost out on value because he sat for two years of his rookie deal, thats not my idea of maxing out value with a draft pick,
I had the thought cross my mind that even though Pickens is kind of sus to me, it could potentially be a brilliant pick if we draft him and then sign AJ Green as a veteran mentor.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
Rashan Gary was a reach, imagine if every player a team takes sits for two years of there rookie contract, or simply just sucks for the first two years ( your choice, suck or sit is the same thing) your team would be named the DEtroit Lions or Cinnci, or Miami.
anyone that thinks drafting high picks to groom in this age of UFA will struggle to field a winning team, this aint the middle ages, I was serious the other day that Gary will be a difficult resign, in that sense we lost out on value because he sat for two years of his rookie deal, thats not my idea of maxing out value with a draft pick,
Why are you bring Rashon Gary into this conversation? What he did in years 1 and 2 has NOTHING to do with this conversation.
Reach is not determined by what players do on the NFL field!
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
We do KNOW, that no NFL GM's like Brian Brohm in the top 60 or wherever he went, despite a public consensus he could be a top 10 pick. We also know no NFL GM"s like DK Metcalf in the top 60, or whatever again.
I actually wouldn't even go as far as to say that.
Let's take something we know as much as possible: Gutey said very explicitly after trading up for Amari Rodgers in round 3 that the decision in round 2 was between Myers and Rodgers. That means that the Packers had Rodgers on their board at worst around 60, but he wasn't selected until 85.
Teams have to have grade and opportunity to make the selection. If a guy goes at 60, we can't say for sure that no one had him top 60, only that no one had him higher than their previous pick.
We do KNOW, that no NFL GM's like Brian Brohm in the top 60 or wherever he went, despite a public consensus he could be a top 10 pick. We also know no NFL GM"s like DK Metcalf in the top 60, or whatever again.
I actually wouldn't even go as far as to say that.
Let's take something we know as much as possible: Gutey said very explicitly after trading up for Amari Rodgers in round 3 that the decision in round 2 was between Myers and Rodgers. That means that the Packers had Rodgers on their board at worst around 60, but he wasn't selected until 85.
Teams have to have grade and opportunity to make the selection. If a guy goes at 60, we can't say for sure that no one had him top 60, only that no one had him higher than their previous pick.
Ok yeah, I did think about that, but was getting too wordy.
More from the sense of teams who maybe just didn't have picks between like 45-60, but you can start to draw some conclusions from guys dropping vs. guys who are picked earlier than expected.
Time to bring back #GaryGang! (which as we all know was invented for the sole purpose of bullying yoop/haters when they come after Our Boi).
Also, I just got done watching Andy's video about Christian Watson. I'm not like "in love" with the idea of him in Round 1 but after watching that breakdown, I would overall be pretty happy with it. And again, we have two firsts, so we have more leeway to be daring with our pick.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
I had the thought cross my mind that even though Pickens is kind of sus to me, it could potentially be a brilliant pick if we draft him and then sign AJ Green as a veteran mentor.
Why AJ Green specifically?
I mean I like the play. But it could be true with anyone. Is it the UGA connection?
But yes, Pickens, a veteran mentor, and either Watson or Pierce.
I had the thought cross my mind that even though Pickens is kind of sus to me, it could potentially be a brilliant pick if we draft him and then sign AJ Green as a veteran mentor.
Why AJ Green specifically?
I mean I like the play. But it could be true with anyone. Is it the UGA connection?
But yes, Pickens, a veteran mentor, and either Watson or Pierce.
Yeah mainly UGA lineage, I think it would potentially be appealing to both parties to work together. I also think that Green's game would be a good one for Pickens to try to emulate since he has a similar athletic talent.
“Most other nations don't allow a terrorist to be their leader.”
“... Yet so many allow their leaders to be terrorists.”—Magneto
Rashan Gary was a reach, imagine if every player a team takes sits for two years of there rookie contract, or simply just sucks for the first two years ( your choice, suck or sit is the same thing) your team would be named the DEtroit Lions or Cinnci, or Miami.
anyone that thinks drafting high picks to groom in this age of UFA will struggle to field a winning team, this aint the middle ages, I was serious the other day that Gary will be a difficult resign, in that sense we lost out on value because he sat for two years of his rookie deal, thats not my idea of maxing out value with a draft pick,
Why are you bring Rashon Gary into this conversation? What he did in years 1 and 2 has NOTHING to do with this conversation.
Reach is not determined by what players do on the NFL field!
proof is in the pudding, of course where a player is picked, and how they perform determines whether he was over drafted or not.
this is you again convoluting reality with what ever you want others to believe, if I say Gute reached on a draft pick and that player sucks, then I was right to say he reached for that player, if draft grades are drastically opposed to the slot he was taken, then its fair to say he was reached for
Rashan Gary was a reach, imagine if every player a team takes sits for two years of there rookie contract, or simply just sucks for the first two years ( your choice, suck or sit is the same thing) your team would be named the DEtroit Lions or Cinnci, or Miami.
anyone that thinks drafting high picks to groom in this age of UFA will struggle to field a winning team, this aint the middle ages, I was serious the other day that Gary will be a difficult resign, in that sense we lost out on value because he sat for two years of his rookie deal, thats not my idea of maxing out value with a draft pick,
Why are you bring Rashon Gary into this conversation? What he did in years 1 and 2 has NOTHING to do with this conversation.
Reach is not determined by what players do on the NFL field!
proof is in the pudding, of course where a player is picked, and how they perform determines whether he was over drafted or not.
this is you again convoluting reality with what ever you want others to believe, if I say Gute reached on a draft pick and that player sucks, then I was right to say he reached for that player, if draft grades are drastically opposed to the slot he was taken, then its fair to say he was reached for
No, I am not "convoluting reality," you are simply VERY confused on what is being talked about. What a player did in their career does not mean they were "over drafted." It means they were a bust. Jamarcus Russell was a bust, not "over drafted" or a reach. Why do you think we hear the term reach all the time on draft weekend? These players haven't even set foot on an NFL field!!
A player can be a draft reach and a Hall of Famer. A player can be a draft steal and a Hall of Famer. A player can be a draft reach and a bust. A player can be a draft steal and a bust.
What a player does in their career does not mean someone is right or wrong for calling a player a draft reach.
Last edited by Pckfn23 on 14 Apr 2022 11:13, edited 2 times in total.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
Yep, was in Dane Brugler's monster draft guide. Pretty awesome connection.
Palmy - "Very few have the ability to truly excel regardless of system. For many the system is the difference between being just a guy or an NFL starter. Fact is, everyone is talented at this level."
Why are you bring Rashon Gary into this conversation? What he did in years 1 and 2 has NOTHING to do with this conversation.
Reach is not determined by what players do on the NFL field!
proof is in the pudding, of course where a player is picked, and how they perform determines whether he was over drafted or not.
this is you again convoluting reality with what ever you want others to believe, if I say Gute reached on a draft pick and that player sucks, then I was right to say he reached for that player, if draft grades are drastically opposed to the slot he was taken, then its fair to say he was reached for
No, I am not "convoluting reality," you are simply VERY confused on what is being talked about. What a player did in their career does not mean they were "over drafted." It means they were a bust. Jamarcus Russell was a bust, not "over drafted" or a reach. Why do you think we hear the term reach all the time on draft weekend? These players haven't even set foot on an NFL field!!
A player can be a draft reach and a Hall of Famer. A player can be a draft steal and a Hall of Famer. A player can be a draft reach and a bust. A player can be a draft steal and a bust.
What a player does in their career does not mean someone is right or wrong for calling a player a draft reach.
Before you continue arguing for another 3 pages, you are both right.
[mention]Yoop[/mention] is using a very generally accepted definition of the term reach. It exists within the media draft community and can reasonably be determined at the time a player is drafted and certainly applied as the results of that players career confirm or refute the reach label.
[mention]Pckfn23[/mention] is using a 100% correct opposition to that generally accepted definition. He already laid out Nick Collins as the perfect example. Collins was a reach. Was he? How can a player be a reach if another team was set to take him immediately following your spot? Isn't that the very opposite of the generally accepted definition?
The old adage, it only takes one... teams could not give a &%$@ less about this. It's a media and draft community thing that we talk about and discuss. It is 100% opinion and only in rare cases like the Collins example can you actually refute the opinion with concrete evidence.
Why are you bring Rashon Gary into this conversation? What he did in years 1 and 2 has NOTHING to do with this conversation.
Reach is not determined by what players do on the NFL field!
proof is in the pudding, of course where a player is picked, and how they perform determines whether he was over drafted or not.
this is you again convoluting reality with what ever you want others to believe, if I say Gute reached on a draft pick and that player sucks, then I was right to say he reached for that player, if draft grades are drastically opposed to the slot he was taken, then its fair to say he was reached for
No, I am not "convoluting reality," you are simply VERY confused on what is being talked about. What a player did in their career does not mean they were "over drafted." It means they were a bust. Jamarcus Russell was a bust, not "over drafted" or a reach. Why do you think we hear the term reach all the time on draft weekend? These players haven't even set foot on an NFL field!!
A player can be a draft reach and a Hall of Famer. A player can be a draft steal and a Hall of Famer. A player can be a draft reach and a bust. A player can be a draft steal and a bust.
What a player does in their career does not mean someone is right or wrong for calling a player a draft reach.
here you are doing your 180 act again, never ends with you, twist everything till the whole forum is fed up
this was what started this
I was thinking where will Mel Kiper have him ranked tomorrow, seems every 3 or 4 days KIper has a new top 50 big board. he had just mocked Watson to us at slot #22, then I said.
All it takes is one GM to fall in love with his test scores and Walla he's snatched up far sooner then he should be, most reports I've read say late 2nd round, that seems about right.
you followed with " who forms these consensus opinions"
well 23, who and what had we been talking about? seriously, are you so dumb founded that you really didn't know? of course you knew, yet you have this sick desire to drag this out twisting every possible wording with your last line ignorant BS.
If Watson is taken in round one it will be considered by just about every draftnik and probably most GM's as a reach, and if he takes 2 or 3 years to get coached up it will be3 conformed that it was a reach, is that simple enough for you?
now where not allowed to call a pick a reach, because we can't prove it till the player busts out 3 years later, or however long it takes for the GM to admit he screwed up and cuts the guy, some last there whole rookie contract.
