Clark is a good pro? Since when? No one, especially not the 69ers, is shy about running right up Clark’s butt hole and no sure as fuck ain’t afraid of Clark’s dudly pass rush.Originally Posted by bobblehead
Clark is a good pro? Since when? No one, especially not the 69ers, is shy about running right up Clark’s butt hole and no sure as fuck ain’t afraid of Clark’s dudly pass rush.
I'm not going to stop the wheel. I'm going to break the wheel.
Michels was drafted by Wolf, yes. I agree with you, Bobble, about Sherrod. He had a bit of the dancing bear thing going on, but also the makings of a good left tackle, kind of like Clifton - supreme pass blocker, decent run blocker. "Jones" - I'm not sure who you're referring to there. Aaron Taylor I remember. And yes, Clark is a really good pro.
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
Might be referring to Datone Jones, who was JAG at best.
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
That is Fat One Jones per my autocorrect in a game day thread once.
But Rodgers leads the league in frumpy expressions and negative body language on the sideline, which makes him, like Josh Allen, a unique double threat.
-Tim Harmston
What? Did you discover that the talent gap between pick # 44 and pick # 78 is less than the talent gap between pick #64 and an undrafted player? Are you sure? Shocking!
Seems like a fair comp. 2nd rounder to a 4th and then a 2nd rounder to an UDFA.
edit: should have read it through. Could have figured out someone realized his ridiculous post.
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
Fine. Now compare the Fucking Center to your boi, “Josh Newman.” Nijman ain’t anything special but he is, in fact, a better tackle than the Fucking Center. Aren’t tackles supposed to be more valuable than guards? Nevertheless, the talent gap between Fucking Center and Nijman ain’t as titanic as that of Metcalf and Lazard.
Much like Wolf’s decision not to draft Moss fucked Bert Favor, German Shepherd’s incompetent decision to take the Fucking Center over Metcalf (or AJ Brown) pretty much costed Butte a ring or two.
I'm not going to stop the wheel. I'm going to break the wheel.
This post needs to be reposted.
I'm not going to stop the wheel. I'm going to break the wheel.
I appreciate apb being the silly contrarian.
To think OL and DL lacks extreme strength, technique, agility, etc and that there’s not a huge difference in quality is one of the silliest things I’ve ever read.
Best player available - ideally one that you need.
Why? It's totally stupid.
Maybe that IS why.
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
100% Agree.
I appreciate some of the attempts at humor, but to suggest OL or DL are not worthy of premium picks is downright crazy.
Ask LAR how they felt about drafting Aaron Donald in R1, or KC about their Super Bowl fortunes without Chris Jones.
While you're at it, ask KC feels about having lost both starting OT and getting absolutely ransacked by Tampa Bay's DL in Super Bowl LV. Ask CIN and Joe Burrow how they felt about getting sacked 7 times by LAR in Super Bowl LVI. Talent and depth matters on the OL and DL.
I don't agree with everything APB says even in this part of the forum, but he makes far more sense than the ya'all clique of posters.
D Line, yeah at times a top draft pick there is warranted, just not this year considering the quality the Packers already have there. O Line? NEVER! It's the skill positions, particularly QB that determine success on offense, and the past three decades or more of Packer football demonstrate that. Any perception of high quality O Line play was the result of Favre, Rodgers, and as of last year, Love. The line was porous but the QBs succeeded anyway, and the team was great most of that past three decades. It's only a little less obvious with the running game. It succeeded because of the greatness of the passing game as well as having decent RBs. The key was and always will be a pass first offense with fast RBs as a change of pass to that passing game.
Some will ignorantly say "you can't do it without an O Line". Duh. You need to have somebody playing O Line, taking up space at least. But do you need greatness in the O Line? Hell no. And if you do have greatness, will there be success without a quality QB and excellent RBs and receivers? Also hell no. Sure, if you get some lemon like Marshall House playing, it can screw things up. But not much above that level/mediocrity - as the Packers have consistently had, whether ya'all admit it or not, and things will be just fine, as they have been for most of the past 30+ years in Green Bay. Thus, O Line is NOT worthy of "premium picks".
What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
If it’s just taking up space and no technique - then why not just use UDFAs.
I’d argue a LT is one of the most important positions on the team.
I like apb when he's being a bit goofy, but I actually think he is serious here. Wrong, but serious.
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
BTW, Marshall Newhouse was not a "lemon". He played 10 seasons in the league and
per the Internet.started at left tackle for 13 games during 2011 season when the Packers went 15–1. Newhouse continued as the Packers' starting left tackle for all 16 regular season games and 2 playoff games in 2012
He played in 133 games and started 81 on them. For a R5 pick, that's pretty darn good.
What you're calling a lemon is actually a league-average 'C to C+' player at worst. That you think he wasn't very good shows what you consider average to be. Lining up 5 UDFAs to basically be fat, slow and unathletic shock absorbers won't protect a QB against a good pass rush, and it sure won't open holes for a run game. It would actually be worse than 5 Newhouses. It would be as bad if not worse than 5 Jake Hansons or Royce Newmans.
You can absolutely find value at OL in Day 3, but league wide those guys are much more likely to be subpar or outright failures. GB has been above average in developing OL players for a few decades now, and some here clearly underappreciate that.
He played like a lemon for the Packers. Your stats pretty much demonstrate what I'm saying about O Line quality not being very important, and mediocrity being good enough. Hanson also I would put in the lemon category. Newman maybe. It's hard to figure why he went from at least adequate his first year to noticeably bad after that. Why not put 5 UDFAs there? You probably could as a worst case and still get by. If you did that, though, you'd probably get a couple of Hanson or House types, bad enough that it actually did have a bad effect. Mediocrity, however, as we have generally had over the years (and hell yeah, I include ya'all's sacred cow in that) is plenty good enough.
edit: yeah, Newhouse - he was so forgettable that I forgot his name.
What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
Kool Aid McKinstry #1 Pick
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others. - Pericles
Very possible. I've felt for a while that the top player on the Packers board at 25 will either be a CB or an OT. Cooper DeJean, Nate Wiggins and Kool Aid are all possibilities.
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
McKinstry is a good "oh shit" pick, because it quite looks as if the best player available will not be at a position of much need. Ideally, a worthy o-line prospect falls into our laps. I don't see the good corners coming down to us. If we draft Wiggins, I am going to have serious doubts that the team actually intends to run more man-to-man on defense.
Interior O-line, LB, and safety are not first round positions.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote