Jordan Morgan, OL, Arizona 2024 1st Round Pick, #25

[Yoop]

Does this fan base know how to be happy anymore? I think not.

Not everything is Kevin King/TJ Watt or Myers/Humphrey or Mandrich/anyone else that year.

Sorry, already a bit burned out on people acting like Morgan was a wasted pick and Barton is a surefire HOFer (not just on here). It's fine to have an opinion, good or bad! But the absolutes kill me before the guy even signs his contract and steps on an NFL field.

Try to sit back and enjoy and have hope and maybe a bit of a positive outlook (this is coming from someone who is negative 99% of the time in everyday life). We've been pretty damn good the last, hmmm 40 years straight? Bears think they are best in the division EVERY OFFSEASON, and they continually F it up. We aren't them and I'm happy about that.

Rant over, talk to you guys in a few hours, Go Pack Go.

some of these huddlers need some THC, massive amounts of the gongie,

It's draft time, it's like Christmas for football fans.

I trust our GM, he knows just how good the players are we do have and what could use improvement, in Morgan he's not the only one that see's a day one starter, or that he has slow feet, or that he resembles Spriggs, or College in any way other then all 3 are OL man, he just like some other see's one of the most ready to play OL in this class, so do I, and so will all the doubters come TC

[Yoop]

the only reason I didn't give this pick a A is because I wanted Arnold

[Drj820]

My only crititique is that there were premium defensive players available and we went OL, because we were in a position where we had to draft for need. Something is going on where the team has given up on Myers at C. They may make him a backup, or they may move him to G. but either way, the backups and stockpile of OLmen has run thin of competent players and we were forced to add a guy who can probably play early. We were kind of forced to draft for need.

I expect the packers to move up and get a premium defender, or use both second round picks on alleged defensive starters. We are dangerously thin at safety and ILB. If Quay or McKinney were to get hurt or could get UGLY fast. I bet we leave tonight with those two situations remedied.

[lupedafiasco]

My main frustration is that Arnold went one pick before. To me Arnold was a sure fire top 20 talent that somehow slipped and to me Morgan wasn’t a top 32 talent to me. TO ME. I don’t know why “to me” is so hard for some of these poster to understand I have a damn opinion and if it’s wrong I always try and state I made a mistake.

The other frustration to me seems to be that even if Arnold was there we still would have taken Morgan and I think that is just wrong.

I don’t believe for a second though we are looking at playing Morgan at OG. This is our LT. I give it a C+ for now. I’ll wait to see how the rest of the draft shakes out before deep diving.

[Madcity_matt]

My only crititique is that there were premium defensive players available and we went OL, because we were in a position where we had to draft for need. Something is going on where the team has given up on Myers at C. They may make him a backup, or they may move him to G. but either way, the backups and stockpile of OLmen has run thin of competent players and we were forced to add a guy who can probably play early. We were kind of forced to draft for need.

I expect the packers to move up and get a premium defender, or use both second round picks on alleged defensive starters. We are dangerously thin at safety and ILB. If Quay or McKinney were to get hurt or could get UGLY fast. I bet we leave tonight with those two situations remedied.

Lost 3 OL, have to restock the jars on the shelf.

[YoHoChecko]

@YoHoChecko you literally typed: "His hands are BAD bad." You have to see that that is far from saying inconsistent.

Inconsistent hands means, what, 20-30% of the time he looks like he has no fundamentals in his hand placement? In the NFL, that's BADbad. I'm assessing them in terms of readiness. You questioned my stance that he is developmental. I am looking at a guy who is not ready to play tackle because of his fundamentals and is not ready to play guard because it's a brand new position for him and he's susceptible to bull rushing. A first round pick who is not ready to play as a starter is developmental. Developmental is not necessarily bad. Gary was developmental; LVN was developmental.

We absolutely have the roster to support developing an OL. I just like a LOT of guys still available about the same. The Packers do NOT agree; they're professionals. They're better at this than me. They have earned the benefit of the doubt. I'm not trashing them or the thought process. I just don't like this player as much as they do and as much as some analysts do. He's not one of my faveorite evaluations. I don't watch much tape; I read people who do. I am not an OL expert; I can't comment on how his slide or shuffle look. I can read and watch videos explaining what people are talking about, and I can see when a player gives a lot of ground.

There is a brand of OL who doesn't look pretty but gets the job done. That was Morgan in college. I have doubts that can be Morgan in the NFL. So I have to hope he takes to coaching and development. Those hopes are exciting when it's for a mid-round pick "look at what he can become!" They're disappointing when it comes with a high pick "look at the risk!"

I think this pick is riskier than a lot of round one OTs--which have a pretty high hit rate. And I think the projection to guard is more a factor of his weakness (arm length, especially) than an expression of traits or body type making him BETTER as a guard.

My amateur opinion which is highly likely to be wrong is that I am disappointed that we didn't get something different; there were a lot of different varieties of differences I would accept. But a guy who seems like a likely LT/LG prospect competition is just slightly off from what I'd prefer. And there's no amount of, like, tweets and arguments that will make me feel like I should reconsider a well-considered opinion. I simply, now, will watch and hope.

Also, this will in no way impact my excitement for Day Two--my favorite day of the draft and a great time to fill some of our roster needs with FOUR picks. I am still stoked.

Morgan is just, like, a guy whose path to playing time and excellence feels mired in obstacles from the state of our current roster to the state of his specific weaknesses. He has a lot of potential and plays a premium position and fits our scheme. He's fine! None of this is doomsaying

[Pckfn23]

@YoHoChecko you literally typed: "His hands are BAD bad." You have to see that that is far from saying inconsistent.

Inconsistent hands means, what, 20-30% of the time he looks like he has no fundamentals in his hand placement? In the NFL, that's BADbad.

And that is just completely made up percentages and saying he has no fundamentals... Come on. The reports read much more like he gets lazy with his hand placement instead of no fundamentals. There are even reports that say pretty much that. A top pass blocking tackle in college does not have BAD bad hands or no fundamentals...

Again, it's not the fact that there is opinion, it's the fact that things are going over the top.

[Willink]

Area of need and stands out in-game Obviously just hope he doesn't become Sherrod or Spriggs.

[Yoop]

My main frustration is that Arnold went one pick before. To me Arnold was a sure fire top 20 talent that somehow slipped and to me Morgan wasn’t a top 32 talent to me. TO ME. I don’t know why “to me” is so hard for some of these poster to understand I have a damn opinion and if it’s wrong I always try and state I made a mistake.

The other frustration to me seems to be that even if Arnold was there we still would have taken Morgan and I think that is just wrong.

I don’t believe for a second though we are looking at playing Morgan at OG. This is our LT. I give it a C+ for now. I’ll wait to see how the rest of the draft shakes out before deep diving.

I sorta went from Barton and DeJean at slot 25 to trading to later first and taking Morgan, or trading up for Fuehuna (SP) or Arnold, I thought both Barton and DEJean as well as Arnold would be taken prior, this draft was hard to predict from one pick to the next for me

We could play Morgan anywhere for a season, wouldn't be the first oliner we moved around, his attractiveness is also his versatility, as Gute said, the best 5 play, somewhere.

right now it's reported that Gute is attempting to trade up, Dejean would make a lot of sense to me, or maybe a lber

[Yoop]

Also, this will in no way impact my excitement for Day Two--my favorite day of the draft and a great time to fill some of our roster needs with FOUR picks. I am still stoked.

stay stoked and get toked it's Friday night

I know I get frustrated and upset when the pick just doesn't make sense or I know a BPA or even several (IMHO ) are also available, typically it turns out the player chosen works out, sometimes obviously they don't and I get to I told ya so, which again is rare ( I wont get into the WR thing and bore you to death lol)

I have a feeling Guty may make a trade up from 41, and we have the ammo to do so, should be exciting.

[JKB]

Gutey says he can play 4 positions.

"best 5" talk will follow strongly and heavily

As it should

[JKB]

J Morgan is a LT.
Was overall 5 rated Tackle!

His best health years are coming….surgery…

After the revolving door OL we have been forced to go thru because of injuries ect.

Was an absolute no brainer to grab a top rated LT at 25!

The best 5 for the team will play!

If the Lions hadn’t moved up…. Maybe maybe maybe Gut didn’t draft him? We will probably never know

[Pckfn23]

According to The Fort Worth Star-Telegram’s Clarence Hill Jr., Jones, in a post-selection interview session, told the media that the following players were prospects that he “coveted” with the 24th overall pick: Arizona tackle Jordan Morgan, Oklahoma tackle Tyler Guyton, Missouri defensive lineman Darius Robinson and Duke offensive lineman Graham Barton.

[paco]

[YoHoChecko]

Yeah, I have no doubt that Dallas or Baltimore would have drafted Morgan if they could. The placement of the pick is not my issue, at least. I know very well that 25-25 was the Jordan Morgan range.

[Pckfn23]

Yeah, I have no doubt that Dallas or Baltimore would have drafted Morgan if they could. The placement of the pick is not my issue, at least. I know very well that 25-25 was the Jordan Morgan range.

Yet you claimed he is the same as a 3rd round guy, or we could have gotten the same type of lineman in the 3rd round. 4 teams at the end of the first round had him on their radar there. Maybe, just maybe those teams know more than US.

[YoHoChecko]

Yeah, I have no doubt that Dallas or Baltimore would have drafted Morgan if they could. The placement of the pick is not my issue, at least. I know very well that 25-25 was the Jordan Morgan range.

Yet you claimed he is the same as a 3rd round guy, or we could have gotten the same type of lineman in the 3rd round. 4 teams at the end of the first round had him on their radar there. Maybe, just maybe those teams know more than US.

My thought is that if he isn't ready to win a starting job from Day One then you can gamble on someone who is even more raw but with similar athletic upside on Day Two. I really really like Brandon Coleman and I think he makes more sense as a RT/RG option. I really like the Yale guy whose name I can't spell in my current condition, who needs a lot more development, but who will probably accomplish that development in a similar amount of time. And Kingsley who just went was another guy I see similarly, but higher than the other two.

There's a "ready to play/not ready to play" binary that I'm operating on that makes someone who is not ready to play similar in value to someone else who is not ready to play even if one is "more ready." I think any of them will be ready by year two and not by year one. So a larger project or a smaller project... upside and not ready are the unifying criteria.

Everyone's situation is different. The Packers are a contending team with zero OL depth. I want a C/G and a RG/OT who can compete from Day One. I don't think we got that. Once we didn't get that, I don't like the value in round one. That's all there is to it. It makes perfect sense; there's a method and rationale to my point of view, whether you want to smear it as irrational negativity or not.

[Pckfn23]

@YoHoChecko yet 3 other teams other than the Packers are verified to believe he is ready to play. I think you are operating under a false assumption because you wanted to go secondary with the pick. There is almost nothing out there that claims he is a developmental lineman. This is just something you have gone with.

He wasn't on my radar at 25 either, but a versatile OL was and after Fautanu went he looks like the next best thing. A possible LT day one who could move inside if that doesn't work out.

[TheSkeptic]

Yeah, I have no doubt that Dallas or Baltimore would have drafted Morgan if they could. The placement of the pick is not my issue, at least. I know very well that 25-25 was the Jordan Morgan range.

Yet you claimed he is the same as a 3rd round guy, or we could have gotten the same type of lineman in the 3rd round. 4 teams at the end of the first round had him on their radar there. Maybe, just maybe those teams know more than US.

My thought is that if he isn't ready to win a starting job from Day One then you can gamble on someone who is even more raw but with similar athletic upside on Day Two. I really really like Brandon Coleman and I think he makes more sense as a RT/RG option. I really like the Yale guy whose name I can't spell in my current condition, who needs a lot more development, but who will probably accomplish that development in a similar amount of time. And Kingsley who just went was another guy I see similarly, but higher than the other two.

There's a "ready to play/not ready to play" binary that I'm operating on that makes someone who is not ready to play similar in value to someone else who is not ready to play even if one is "more ready." I think any of them will be ready by year two and not by year one. So a larger project or a smaller project... upside and not ready are the unifying criteria.

Everyone's situation is different. The Packers are a contending team with zero OL depth. I want a C/G and a RG/OT who can compete from Day One. I don't think we got that. Once we didn't get that, I don't like the value in round one. That's all there is to it. It makes perfect sense; there's a method and rationale to my point of view, whether you want to smear it as irrational negativity or not.

I agree with this. The Packers drafted their 1st backup for either guard or RT. If Walker were to get hurt it is possible they would move Jenkins and then he would start at LG. But if no one gets hurt Morgan does not play this year. And lets get real. Morgan is never going to play LT for the Packers unless Walker has a career ending injury. Walker came on strong in the second half of last year, his 2nd year. Walker is at least an average NFL LT and he is highly likely to continue to improve.

Morgan is never going to play RT unless Tom gets hurt or is moved. And Myers is a better center than Morgan is a RT, at least this year - moving Tom to center degrades the entire Oline.

Morgan is never going to play LG unless Jenkins gets hurt, retires of is moved to LT or center. That leaves only 1 position where he could compete, RG and I doubt he wins that battle this season unless someone gets hurt and he plays lights out as a substitute.

Conclusion: The Packers drafted a backup with #25. Long term it might have been the correct thing to do. But the Packers are a good playoff team that needs 2 starters on D. I'd rather have taken a backup/project Olineman in the 3rd round.

[go pak go]

Morgan can compete at starter on three spots and be a backup at four spots.

Elgton Jenkins is not a good tackle. He has shown that to us the last two years. Elgton is an interior guy who can play tackle in a pinch but he isn't good at it. Especially bad at RT.

Walker has the opportunity to compete for either tackle spot, which I imagine is where he will be early in camp and then the opportunity to transition to compete with Rhyan. The value is there. It's not about value. We needed a versatile Olineman. The question is the player and by all rights and purposes...he seems to be a good player.