2021 Post Draft Discussion

[YoHoChecko]

So as I've been learning more, here's where I stand.

I have close to zero doubt that our first three picks will be contributing NFL players within their first contract.

How good or bad this draft is depends, then, on a couple of variables:

• Do any of those three go beyond contributing NFL players to high-level or even All Pro starters?

• Do we hit on any of the guys from Day 3, particularly future starter at RT and TJ Slaton?

• Whether our ST units improve dramatically

Those are really the factors that will determine where in the hindsight draft grades 3-5 years from now will land between a C and an A

[Yoop]

Of the 44 guys I put on my pre-draft "wish list," 22 of them went to 6 NFL teams who each had at least three players on my list.

And that doesn't even include guys I like high in round one but didn't consider because they're out of reach for me.

Basically I should be a scout for the Jets, Chargers, WFT, Jaguars, Lions, or Eagles Clearly their GMs are on the same page as I am

didn't know the Lions had a GM, so you may be able to walk right in that room, keep your demands low at first though, the Ford foundation lost a bundle with the pandemic

[NCF]

Interesting name. I forgot about the Hackett connection.

[YoHoChecko]

Interesting name. I forgot about the Hackett connection.

Not sure why it's in this thread, but yeah... why do you think I said Bortles and Mullens? Bortles also played for the Rams. Bortles has a ton of connections to this staff. He's almost assuredly on the short list for a camp arm/potential backup. If Rodgers does leave, I don't want Bortles as the starter if Love isn't ready, though.

[NCF]

Interesting name. I forgot about the Hackett connection.

Not sure why it's in this thread, but yeah... why do you think I said Bortles and Mullens? Bortles also played for the Rams. Bortles has a ton of connections to this staff. He's almost assuredly on the short list for a camp arm/potential backup. If Rodgers does leave, I don't want Bortles as the starter if Love isn't ready, though.

Didn't know where else to stick it. It is a post-draft topic... the other QB conversations that were had, no idea where those are buried in the Rodgers threads.

[YoHoChecko]

Yeah, the veteran options are thin right now, but Mullens and Bortles are really the only ones I'm interested that aren't on a roster. And since we didn't snag any rookie UDFA QBs, I'm thinking maybe both.

I hope enough Packers get vaccinated to have in person everything this offseason (apparently the NFL will have a threshold where once a team reaches a certain point, restrictions are relaxed; Buffalo GM Billy Beane even said if he's one player away from having a more "regular" offseason he'll find an unvaccinated player to cut to tip the balance)

But our young guys from last year and this year's rookie class would really benefit from a real offseason.

[YoHoChecko]

I've been harping for a couple of years on my theory that MLF doesn't like to play rookies and avoids it if he has other options. I've had some limited evidence, but always said it's a small sample size. Generally, I point out that aside from Savage, the other rookie contributors only see the field when there is injury or almost no other choice. Krys Barnes might be an exception, but he might qualify as no other choice.

Now that the offseason program is done, I just want to say that the rookies have been treated a little differently this year. At the time of the draft, it felt like we had more potential immediate contributors, if MLF wanted to use them. Based on the usage in OTAs and minicamp--Myers as the starting C from the jump, Stokes and Rodgers getting lots of rotational time with the 1s, Royce Newman getting time at two positions with the 1s... it feels like there has been more offseason emphasis on getting these guys ready to go.

I just wanted to point this out before the season comes. We might be looking at a shifting approach, or maybe just a team in a slightly different phase, or maybe just the lack of COVID. Whatever it is, I feel like the team is anticipating and setting up a bigger rookie contribution this year than the previous two.

RELATED:

[APB]

Three of the players you mention specifically - Stokes, Myers, and Rodgers - also happen to coincide with three positional groups that have either lost a quality starter or will very likely suffer significant losses very soon. Linsley is already gone and Myers most certainly projects as his replacement. Alexander and Adams are both due big future contracts and it would seem their departures could be imminent, too, thus the immediate need to develop their successors.

I guess you could call it a philosophy change. I think it's more an acknowledgement of reality in that you just can't sit on rookies with the ever present roster churn.

[Yoop]

I've been harping for a couple of years on my theory that MLF doesn't like to play rookies and avoids it if he has other options. I've had some limited evidence, but always said it's a small sample size. Generally, I point out that aside from Savage, the other rookie contributors only see the field when there is injury or almost no other choice. Krys Barnes might be an exception, but he might qualify as no other choice.

I don't think MLF is as averse to starting Rookies as McCarthy was, Jenkins, Savage, Alex where starting by there 3rd game, and the only reason Gary didn't start had to do with the UFA Smiths.

Martin just like any other drafted ILB had to start, the position has been atrocious for years, as you said, not so much by choice, same with Barnes.

sure if we still had Linsley Myers may not start, or he might start at a g spot, best 5 play, but minus Linsley he's plug and play at C

I see no reason why Stokes shouldn't start, or at least rotate in when/if we use Alex in the slot, which I expect we will, ya can't keep the speed Stokes has on the bench, I'd bet he's as technically sound has King by week 3 or 4, and his speed allows him to compensate for those short comings some, gotta get him on the field.


never understood McCarthy's refusal to play Cobb more his rookie season, pure insanity, kid was ready to play almost day 1, I don't expect MLF to do the same with A. Rodgers, not after using Ervin the way he did starting with the first game last year, the gadget player is a staple in his schemes, and Rodgers brings that and more to the show.

I typically agree, often starting a rookie can lead to mistakes, bad for the team, and bad for the players confidence, but if the player is pro game ready then ya have to work them in, some slowly, others though like Jenkins, Savage, Alex, and probably Myers need game conditions to take the next leap.

[go pak go]

Cobb didn't play much in 2011 because our WR corps was insane.

1. Greg Jennings
2. James Jones
3. Jordy Nelson
4. Donald Driver
5. Randle Cobb

And we also had JFin coming back from injury.

The 2011 offensive roster was ridiculous so not playing Cobb was more about just too many mouths to feed rather than not wanting to play a rookie.

Oh and I believe Randle Cobb scored a TD week 1 vs the Saints in 2011 and he admitted after the game he ran the wrong route. So that my have had something to do with it too.

[YoHoChecko]

Jenkins, Savage, Alex where starting by there 3rd game, and the only reason Gary didn't start had to do with the UFA Smiths.

I mean, if you're talking about Alexander by "Alex," that was MM.

Savage is the only one who was slotted into the starting role from the jump, like Myers is right now.

Jenkins, as we know, took over only when Lane Taylor suffered an injury. MLF explicitly stated when Taylor won the starting job that he thought it was important to have someone with experience in there. He later echoed that statement when he replaced Jon Runyan Jr in the starting lineup last year before the Eagles game. He said that the veteran DTs of the Eagles presented a challenge that he thought he'd be more comfortable having an experienced player in there, despite in both situations, the rookie (Jenkins and Runyan) playing well enough to retain the jobs.

When it comes to Gary, we heard his position coach explicitly say, just last month, that he was glad Gary was brought along slowly and that he has seen too many guys hurt by being thrown in before they're ready. At that position, in reference to gary. I know [mention]Yoop[/mention] disagreed with that rationale, but if we're talking about the coaching staff preferences, the coaching staff's quotes and actions hold all the weight.

So Barnes and Martin at ILB are the only guys that you could argue (especially Barnes, who started as ILB2 week one as an UDFA) were inserted into the lineup without necessity--technically, yeah, that could have been Ty Summers or Oren Burks. But I think at that point, Summers and Burks had proven they weren't ready, either, both being young and unpolished, and so a rookie versus someone who barely counts as a veteran sort of leveled the playing field.

But the point of this post was to say that the WAY these offseasons are going, in addition to the TYPE of players they drafted this year, feels different. That might mean that I was wrong all along. It's always been a small sample size; one year was marred by the COVID offseason which hindered rookies' development time. Or it might mean that there is a shift in thinking--that some of these players are filling pretty direct holes and need to be ready faster. That relying on average vets over rookies who look the part has been shown not to be of much benefit, i.e. Taylor over Jenkins, Kirksey over the young LBs, or even Preston over year2 Gary.

Maybe Stokes and Jean-Charles are being groomed to more-hurriedly replace King and Sullivan. Josh Myers is CLEARLY being groomed to be the day one starter at C the way Savage was at safety (I include Savage as my "no choice but to play him" in the past, since they had absolutely no capable safeties aside from Savage and Amos).

Anyway, like I said. Maybe I misread MLF's aversion based on a few quotes and an apparent pattern. Maybe I read it wrong because the specific rookies we drafted needed more time for the most part, and MLF has always played it case-by-case, but I thought I saw a broader pattern. Maybe I read it correctly and his views have begun to shift. Maybe I read it correctly but the priorities and phase of the team have shifted. I just wanted to point out that in regards to rookie impacts, this year feels different.

[Yoop]

Cobb didn't play much in 2011 because our WR corps was insane.

1. Greg Jennings
2. James Jones
3. Jordy Nelson
4. Donald Driver
5. Randle Cobb

And we also had JFin coming back from injury.

The 2011 offensive roster was ridiculous so not playing Cobb was more about just too many mouths to feed rather than not wanting to play a rookie.

Oh and I believe Randle Cobb scored a TD week 1 vs the Saints in 2011 and he admitted after the game he ran the wrong route. So that my have had something to do with it too.

Driver had 12 ypc, Cobb 15 ypc, McCarthy kept the aged Driver on the field over giving the upstart Cobb more action, and please show where Cobb said he ran the wrong route????

https://www.footballdb.com/teams/nfl/gr ... stats/2011

heres what I think, we lost two games that season because we didn't have a good short game or a defense that could protect a lead, teams defended us deep with cover two and 3 blanketing the deep routes which had been successful all year, and where successful using 4 or even 5 man rush packages, they made sure Rodgers wouldn't have time in the pocket to wait for deeper routes to open up, schemes to do what Cobb does best where needed in those games, all of our receivers where kept in check, Cobb though was 3 for 3 though and should have been fed the ball more.

we had a high power passing attack that depended on Rodgers having time to throw, what we needed was a up tempo, on schedule passing scheme for when he didn't have the time, which Cobb would have excelled in, cripe sakes, Rodger was our most successful runner in that game, we drafted Cobb for just such a situation, then only threw him the ball 3 times.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... 150gnb.htm

[lupedafiasco]

I’m not gonna look it up but Cobb absolutely ran the wrong route. He ran a slant over the middle and was wide open. Took it to the house.

[Yoop]

When it comes to Gary, we heard his position coach explicitly say, just last month, that he was glad Gary was brought along slowly and that he has seen too many guys hurt by being thrown in before they're ready. At that position, in reference to gary. I know @Yoop disagreed with that rationale, but if we're talking about the coaching staff preferences, the coaching staff's quotes and actions hold all the weight.

I get Smiths point, why rush a rookie specially when ya just spent over 100 mil on ufa vets, as to the getting hurt stuff and anything else he said about why he didn't use Gary as a rookie is just excuses to me, Rookie outside rushers start every season, ya don't draft edge rushers in round one to groom them, that doesn't even make sense, specially a 12 slot pick, Mathews started the 3rd game of his rookie season and had 10 sacks.

don't take this wrong, I hope and expect Gary to do well, and I think your right, and have said it for awhile now, there is far to much team player turnover to wait for Rookies to develop for years, we could have used a stud DL pick, or other positions over using that 12 slot on Gary 3 years ago.

[Yoop]

I’m not gonna look it up but Cobb absolutely ran the wrong route. He ran a slant over the middle and was wide open. Took it to the house.

OK then, but maybe more of our receivers should have run the wrong routes with success like that. point is Cobb deserved more then 25 targets his rookie season, Driver was done, almost 15 more catches and only toped Cobb by a 100 yrds, and probably do to deeper routes.

[go pak go]

"I ran the wrong route and luckily scored," Cobb said. "I'm going to hear about that in meeting tomorrow and probably get a negative [grade] for it. But we just made a play. That was the big thing."

I wasn't attacking your theory yoop. I was just saying why Mac made the decision he probably made and then put in the funny story of Cobb's first TD catch being on the hands of running the wrong route. It was supposed to be FUNNY!! Because the result was he scored!

As far as Cobb over Driver. I agree. Cobb should have gotten more snaps. But it was also DONALD DRIVER. Packers Legend. And we are talking about playing time between the #4 and #5 WR.

Like who cares?

[lupedafiasco]

I’m not gonna look it up but Cobb absolutely ran the wrong route. He ran a slant over the middle and was wide open. Took it to the house.

OK then, but maybe more of our receivers should have run the wrong routes with success like that. point is Cobb deserved more then 25 targets his rookie season, Driver was done, almost 15 more catches and only toped Cobb by a 100 yrds, and probably do to deeper routes.

I hear what you’re saying but that’s a Rodgers problem too. Imagine Rodgers out there with guys running the wrong routes. He would lose his god damn mind.

[APB]

I’m not gonna look it up but Cobb absolutely ran the wrong route. He ran a slant over the middle and was wide open. Took it to the house.

OK then, but maybe more of our receivers should have run the wrong routes with success like that. point is Cobb deserved more then 25 targets his rookie season, Driver was done, almost 15 more catches and only toped Cobb by a 100 yrds, and probably do to deeper routes.

I hear what you’re saying but that’s a Rodgers problem too. Imagine Rodgers out there with guys running the wrong routes. He would lose his god damn mind.

You just had to sequence the words "Rodgers" and "problem" in succession. Now you've gone and done it...

[go pak go]

OK then, but maybe more of our receivers should have run the wrong routes with success like that. point is Cobb deserved more then 25 targets his rookie season, Driver was done, almost 15 more catches and only toped Cobb by a 100 yrds, and probably do to deeper routes.

I hear what you’re saying but that’s a Rodgers problem too. Imagine Rodgers out there with guys running the wrong routes. He would lose his god damn mind.

You just had to sequence the words "Rodgers" and "problem" in succession. Now you've gone and done it...

The following phrases will now be littered in the pages of this thread to come:

"how do you expect"
"Like I said (lis)"
"it's so obvious"
"been our problem for years"
"I've been saying for years but nobody believed/respected me because we were still scoring poitns and winning games"
"HERO"

[Trudge]

I hear what you’re saying but that’s a Rodgers problem too. Imagine Rodgers out there with guys running the wrong routes. He would lose his god damn mind.

You just had to sequence the words "Rodgers" and "problem" in succession. Now you've gone and done it...

The following phrases will now be littered in the pages of this thread to come:

"how do you expect"
"Like I said (lis)"
"it's so obvious"
"been our problem for years"
"I've been saying for years but nobody believed/respected me because we were still scoring poitns and winning games"
"HERO"

cmon you have to get him to tlak packers football gotta get him in blowouts and preseason come on tt give him a shot