PACKER INSIDER- EARLY VIEWS OF TT'S FIRST DRAFT

[Bretsky]

Thompson's '05 draft might offer little help
Posted: July 20, 2006


Rick Braun
E-MAIL

Green Bay - With the beginning of training camp just a little more than a week away the Green Bay Packers sit on a precipice.

Which way will they go in 2006?

Will general manager Ted Thompson's two years of acquisitions pan out?

Will new coach Mike McCarthy end up being an inspired choice or just another in a long list of coaches who didn't quite cut the mustard in the National Football League?

If McCarthy doesn't succeed, will it be because of his failings or the failings of the players Thompson gave him?

Safeties Nick Collins (36) and Marviel Underwood were two of 11 players drafted by Green Bay's GM Ted Thompson in 2005. Collins is a starter.

Or, as Packer fans have to be hoping, will the Packers become one of the pleasant surprises of the league in 2006?

Those questions will all eventually be answered, but there is so much more at stake than just what happens in the 2006 season.

While Thompson certainly appears cool on the outside, he has to feel a certain amount of weight on his shoulders.

He's had two drafts, two free-agent seasons and now has his own coach in place. Yes, he might still have a bit of a credit limit left on his "Sherman Card" - that's the bit of slack he can be cut after inheriting a roster that wasn't exactly stocked with impact players after former GM and coach Mike Sherman's four-season stint as the man in charge of all things Packer.

But if the Packers are to surprise in 2006, at least a few players from Thompson's 2005 draft must step up and make an impact.

Two players are gone from that class: Injured wide receiver Terrence Murphy and late-pick wide receiver Craig Bragg.

In the case of Murphy, it was simply bad fortune as a neck injury and the discovery of a narrowing of the spinal column forced the Packers to waive a promising prospect.

In the case of Bragg, well, not every draft pick makes it.

But what might be cause for concern is what do the Packers expect out of the rest of that 2005 class this season?

Right now they don't expect anything out of first-round pick Aaron Rodgers - at least they hope they don't have to expect anything. If Rodgers is needed, that means legendary quarterback Brett Favre has been injured. And Rodgers didn't have the kind of summer that made jaws drop in the May and June minicamps.

Safety Nick Collins started all 16 games a year ago and is expected to continue his development. With a year under his belt, he could turn into a big-play safety, and sooner rather than later.

But out of the rest of that class, is there really anyone expected to do big things in 2006? Right now the answer appears to be "No."

In order, the remaining picks were: Murphy in the second round; safety Marviel Underwood in the fourth round; linebacker Brady Poppinga in the fourth round; guard Junius Coston in the fifth round; cornerback Mike Hawkins in the fifth round; defensive end Mike Montgomery in the sixth round; Bragg; linebacker Kurt Campbell in the seventh round; and offensive lineman Will Whitticker in the seventh round.

Just guessing here, but there doesn't appear to be any quick breakouts in the list.

Underwood isn't expected to step up and win a starting spot as he remains behind Collins and free-agent prize Marquand Manuel and is no lock to beat out Mark Roman.

Poppinga is coming off an anterior cruciate ligament injury and already will be 27 just two weeks into the season because he did the Mormon mission thing while at Brigham Young. With the drafting of A.J. Hawk and Abdul Hodge, Poppinga will have his hands full just to win a roster spot.

Coston didn't play a down last season and now has to beat out three more linemen picked in this year's draft. If he doesn't develop quickly, he might be gone.

Hawkins had the "raw" excuse last year. He won't get that slack this season, but he does have great athletic skills. Nonetheless, he'll have to put them on display right away.

Montgomery has promise, but he won't be beating out Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila or Aaron Kampman in this training camp.

Campbell missed all of last season with a knee injury, and now there's a glut at linebacker. If he wins a spot, it will be against huge odds.

And Whitticker is penciled in as having to win a backup spot at tackle after having started all of last season at guard.

So for now, there doesn't appear to be an awful lot of immediate help coming from the 2005 draft.

Just guessing here, but by the end of training camp, the 11-player draft class of 2005 will be down to a class of five or six players, tops. And as of right now, only Collins looks like a starter.

It's still early to rate the class of 2005, but one can bet Thompson will be feeling some pressure as he charts its progress in training camp.

[Bretsky]

Figured I'd try to get some juices stirring on this article.

On draft day many Packer fans were quite upset about many of the picks.

Then our Packer Homerism kicked in.

We started believing AROD had immense talent and was overlooked by all
We believed in TT's pick that Murhpy was by far the best available
We believed TT found a gem in Nick Collins (and he did)
We heard Underwood packs a big punch
We loved Poppinga's attitude, motor, name, and work ethic
We started praising TT for Hawkins and figured his scouts may have struck gold
We believed we found an unrecognized gem in Coston
We hoped for a few players between Whittaker, Campbell, and Montgomery

IT IS NOW ONE YEAR LATER and here are my thoughts..........which will certainly be criticized by some

I STILL HATE THE RODGERS PICK
I STILL THINK TT NEEDED TO GO D OR OL INSTEAD OF MURPHY (while we can't fault him for the specific player becoming hurt)
TT WAS RIGHT ON WITH COLLINS
POPPINGA IS THE MOST OVERRATED PLAYER ON THIS FORUM; love his work eithic and motor, but not nearly the player Barnett is; special teams guy
UNDERWOOD HAS SHOWN NOTHING
HAWKINGS LOOKS MUCH BETTER W/O PADS THAN WITH THEM AND I WONDER IF WE DRAFTED A GREAT ATHLETE THAT CAN'T PLAY FOOTBALL
COSTON IS NOTHING TO GET EXCITED ABOUT
WHITTAKER HAS BACKUP TALENT AT BEST
MONTGOMERY LOOKS GOOD ENOUGH TO BE IN THE DL ROTATION
CAMPBELL WILL BE LUCKY TO MAKE THE ROSTERFINAL JUDGEMENT

At this point in the 2005 draft, TT used 10 picks to get one solid Safety for many years to come, one role player, and a couple special teamers.

At this point to me that's not acceptable and he definitely gets a below average grade in Draft #1.

[Joemailman]

I just don't think you can judge a draft after one year. Obviously Murphy was a big loss. However, I think people are being too quick to write off Poppinga, Coston and Hawkins. I still think Coston has a legitimate shot at a starting position, and Poppinga will be a contriibutor on defense, although he probably won't start. Of course, this draft will always be known as the aaron Rodgers draft, so we can't really judge it until we see what we have in him. I'm neither optimistic or pessimistic. I just think more time is needed to judge this draft.

[Bretsky]

I agree more time is needed; but I'd also say at this point it's a bit of a disappointment

[Zool]

Looking at it versus recent history for the team, its a damned good draft.

[MJZiggy]

B, agreeing that TT needed to have some o-line help out of that draft, I wonder if Murphy had been able to develop and turned into the stud WR that he promised to be, would you still have been against that pick? Which do you do, grab the next TO talent (without the attitude), or get someone who might be decent on the line or might need a couple of years to grow into a starting role? Either way, it still really is too early to judge. Let's see how the kids develop (and Grandpa Popps too).

[HarveyWallbangers]

My big writeup on this was deleted with the server issues, and I don't have the time to write it up again. Boo!
:sad:

[woodbuck27]

Figured I'd try to get some juices stirring on this article.

On draft day many Packer fans were quite upset about many of the picks.

Then our Packer Homerism kicked in.

We started believing AROD had immense talent and was overlooked by all
We believed in TT's pick that Murhpy was by far the best available
We believed TT found a gem in Nick Collins (and he did)
We heard Underwood packs a big punch
We loved Poppinga's attitude, motor, name, and work ethic
We started praising TT for Hawkins and figured his scouts may have struck gold
We believed we found an unrecognized gem in Coston
We hoped for a few players between Whittaker, Campbell, and Montgomery

IT IS NOW ONE YEAR LATER and here are my thoughts..........which will certainly be criticized by some

I STILL HATE THE RODGERS PICK - B.

woodbuck27:

I havn't seen one thing that makes me, even - in a little way, believe that Aaron Rodgers will be a solid starting QB for the Packers. I don't think it will happen either as nice guys don't always finish first.That was a waste of a first round pick - my guts tell me that.

I STILL THINK TT NEEDED TO GO D OR OL INSTEAD OF MURPHY (while we can't fault him for the specific player becoming hurt) B.

woodbuck27:

My hope that TT would select a DE - Justin Tuck (Giants) with his third pick not WR Terrence Murphy. I really came to like Murphy though and felt he would add strong leadership to us.Losing Terrence Murphy as it went was a brutal blow and The nod goes to TT there.

TT WAS RIGHT ON WITH COLLINS - B.

woodbuck27:

Who is Nick Collins has become - look out for Nick Collins!

He was well scouted and lost in the crowd to other teams I guess, or they wanted to wait to get him later (cheaper) in the draft. Turning out to be a solid second pick by Ted Thompson so far.

POPPINGA IS THE MOST OVERRATED PLAYER ON THIS FORUM; love his work eithic and motor, but not nearly the player Barnett is; special teams guy - B.

woodbuck27:

Popp is a player with certain heart and desire and Iam not willing to toss him off just yet. He's a little bit of a Ray Nitschke throwback type - a little bit as Ray is my ALL TIME fav. defensive player. He certainly played well when he was in there and a leader on ST tackles. A tip of the hat to TT on this Packer also.I am certainly pulling alot for Popp.

UNDERWOOD HAS SHOWN NOTHING - B.

woodbuck27:

Let's see if he can bring on the big hits that he is reputed to have in his bag of tricks? He has to step it up for sure but I see him surviving TC if he gives the effort necessary. Want to be a safety with us Marviel? Show it!

HAWKINGS LOOKS MUCH BETTER W/O PADS THAN WITH THEM AND I WONDER IF WE DRAFTED A GREAT ATHLETE THAT CAN'T PLAY FOOTBALL - B.

woodbuck27:

How did you all feel about us drafting Donald Driver in the 7th round? An outstanding athlete coming to the Draft, as you'll re-call. I really was excited and again it was a gut feeling that he would produce for us.

That is not exactly the feeling I have about Michael Hawkins but somewhat similiar. Like Underwood he has to want it but also I have a question of his ability to remain healthy enough to compete? I believe he will exceed Patrick Dendy, but maybe Dendy turns on all the Jets in TC and makes OUR five and dime.

We have two self - proclaimed star's at CB in Harris and Woodson hopefully upgrade us, yet who can't have alot left in the tank . We may have to lock in Hawkins and Dendy for one more season. They may be in by proxy - but will they produce?

My assessment here? TT?


COSTON IS NOTHING TO GET EXCITED ABOUT - B.

woodbuck27:

This young man has alot of potential as he was a decent College player and I liked this pick.He needs time and we will allow it .He survives TC.

OK for TT on this young Packer.

WHITTAKER HAS BACKUP TALENT AT BEST

woodbuck27:

He may well be a victim of TC. I'm not at all surprised if that's the deal as he didn't step in when he had such a real shot last season but like Coston this is only season two.

TT took him what in the 7th so will we be shocked if he fails with us? I won't be.

MONTGOMERY LOOKS GOOD ENOUGH TO BE IN THE DL ROTATION - B.

woodbuck27:

We got a real chance for something special with this young Packer. I look for Montgomery to turn heads in a positive way. Otherwise why didn't TT draft at DE higher? We do have Jolly too now, a leader type - but we're discussing the success of the 2005 draft.

CAMPBELL WILL BE LUCKY TO MAKE THE ROSTERFINAL JUDGEMENT

woodbuck27:

Yup !

At this point in the 2005 draft, TT used 10 picks to get one solid Safety for many years to come, one role player, and a couple special teamers.

At this point to me that's not acceptable and he definitely gets a below average grade in Draft #1.

woodbuck27:

In Review:

It's certainly not looking good at all.

I believe he should also have passed on Aaron Rodgers, as he fell that far for a reason. We are witnessing that reason, and kid yourselves all you want Packer fans. Aaron Rodgers certainly has a long long way to go, to get his head in the starting QB spot and hasn't demonstrated any consistency or the required tools. He's weak to date!

A wasted first round pick will be the final diagnosis.

Nick Collins looks like a stroke of Genious ! So far !!! He was well scouted.

The rest of the drafted players - are big question marks except for Montgomery.

The best Ted thompson gets from me for the 2005 Draft - to date is a 'D'.

Ted Thompson may be plunging to an 'F' from me, before this season ends.

I'm going to watch the cuts at TC very carefully, from the aspect of TT getting his way to make himself look good Versus TT placing the BEST 53-man Roster out there for us.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

If you count Murp as a possible starter I think TT had a great draft. If murp just didnt get hurt he would be starting this year and we would all be givig TT praise that he got two new starter out of his first draft after only one year. And if A-rod turns out to be good then his first three picks were all hits. Any time you get three starters in draft I would say that its a good draft, but as many have said we still need time to see what A-rod does.

[Bretsky]

Looking at it versus recent history for the team, its a damned good draft.

If we are going to set recent history as the norm our expectations are way too low

[Bretsky]

B, agreeing that TT needed to have some o-line help out of that draft, I wonder if Murphy had been able to develop and turned into the stud WR that he promised to be, would you still have been against that pick? Which do you do, grab the next TO talent (without the attitude), or get someone who might be decent on the line or might need a couple of years to grow into a starting role? Either way, it still really is too early to judge. Let's see how the kids develop (and Grandpa Popps too).


I love any Packer, but regarding your first scenario I don't think anybody thought Murphy had star talent; he was a solid deal with a great attitude. I wanted D; beyond that I'd have preferred OL.

[Bretsky]

My big writeup on this was deleted with the server issues, and I don't have the time to write it up again. Boo!
:sad:

Actually Harv the thread was deleted. BUT I took the time to rewrite my entire commentay so get off your @ss and argue something :wink:

[Bretsky]

If you count Murp as a possible starter I think TT had a great draft. If murp just didnt get hurt he would be starting this year and we would all be givig TT praise that he got two new starter out of his first draft after only one year. And if A-rod turns out to be good then his first three picks were all hits. Any time you get three starters in draft I would say that its a good draft, but as many have said we still need time to see what A-rod does.

First off, you can't assume Murphy was turning out so no way can you say first three picks were all hits. He's a non entity we look passed.

Bottom line is right now we have one starter out of 10 pick.

[Guiness]

I think circumstances make the '05 draft very difficult to judge. Murphy and Rodgers skew counting the number of players the draft put on the field.

Murphy certainly had potential to be a starter - he was getting looks from Favre, and the way Fergy blew up, I think he would've seen more balls as the season went on. Who's to say how he would've handled them.

He got (13?) starts out of a 7th round pick - no flies on that even if the guy never plays another down. Even if we don't like him much now.

I didn't like the A-Rod pick, but it was good value for that spot. Teams spend years and lot of picks going through QB prospects. I doubt there is a team in the league who hasn't drafted a QB in the first round in the last decade, only to have him fail. If this was one of ours, so be it.

If Montgomery gets significant time at DE, and most here think he will (no way he's a starter, even if he plays starter minutes) and Popinga becomes a role player I think this draft was fine. Not fabulous, but certainly not terrible either.

[Bretsky]

"He got (13?) starts out of a 7th round pick - no flies on that even if the guy never plays another down. Even if we don't like him much now. "


ON ONE HAND this is a valid point.

On another hand this serves as a perfect example to back up Tank's belief that TT is doing a crap job.

Will Whittaker was a terrible terrible starter....amongst the worst in the NFL

How could Green Bay be in such a dire situation where it leaves itself to accepting this type of starting performance out of a rookie ???

Because we had no other options.

HMMMMMMMMMMM

I just hope we are not saying the same thing out of our OG position one year from now.

Maybe I'm stirring up a fire too early.....or.....Maybe TT should be doing more.


Cheers,
B

[Bretsky]

Regarding Murphy, I'm judging the 2005 draft like we didn't have that pick

1. Rodgers
2 Collins
4 Poppinga
4 Underwood
5 Hawkins
5 Coston
7 Whittakeer
7 Campbell
7 Montgomery

I agree Rodgers is the key to final judgement; but right now out of our 9 picks we don't have much to show.

[MJZiggy]

Will Whittaker was a terrible terrible starter....amongst the worst in the NFL

He was a 7th round rookie trying to replace a pro bowl lineman. I'd say those are big shoes for a 7th rounder to handle in his rookie season. Give him a little time and learning and we'll see if he reaches the potential you'd expect out of the bottom of the 7th round.

[Bretsky]

Will Whittaker was a terrible terrible starter....amongst the worst in the NFL

He was a 7th round rookie trying to replace a pro bowl lineman. I'd say those are big shoes for a 7th rounder to handle in his rookie season. Give him a little time and learning and we'll see if he reaches the potential you'd expect out of the bottom of the 7th round.


Calling him one of the worst starters wasn't really a condemnation of Will Whittaker; he did better than we'd expect out of a 7th.

It was a condemnation of Ted Thompson for leaving us in a situation that would necessitate him to start for so many games when he was clearly not ready.

[MJZiggy]

Will Whittaker was a terrible terrible starter....amongst the worst in the NFL

He was a 7th round rookie trying to replace a pro bowl lineman. I'd say those are big shoes for a 7th rounder to handle in his rookie season. Give him a little time and learning and we'll see if he reaches the potential you'd expect out of the bottom of the 7th round.


Calling him one of the worst starters wasn't really a condemnation of Will Whittaker; he did better than we'd expect out of a 7th.

It was a condemnation of Ted Thompson for leaving us in a situation that would necessitate him to start for so many games when he was clearly not ready.

I asked this question some weeks ago and don't know that anyone knew the answer so I will try again: When it became apparent that Wahle was not intending on resigning in GB, who on the free agent market was available to replace him?

[b bulldog]

If Arod can play at an above average level, I would consider it a decent draft. Collins,Montgomery,Murphy and in my opinion, Underwood, will all or would have all become decent players. If Arod doesn't pan out, the organization will be set back three years and TT may be looking for work!

[Deputy Nutz]

Bretsky you have to ask yourself what you expect out of player picked in a certain round. No one could expect Mark Tauscher becoming the player he was when he was select in the 7th round 6 years ago. KGB basically spent his first year on the practice team. Right now on paper it doesn't look like your going to get 6 or 7 starters. Thats asking a lot. Any time a team gets more than two legit starters in a draft, they are or should be pleased.

Right now Collins is the only legit starter from this draft. Rodgers would be consisdered a starter because he is playing behind Favre.

Hawkins was a 5th round pick that was very raw, but ended up in and out of the dime and nickel packages throughout his rookie year, Underwood as well. Montgomery also made it into the defensive line rotation throughout the year. Coston didn't see any playing time last year, but he is in line to compete for a starting position in his second year. Poppinga was a pick that I was scratching my own head when he was selected. I like his personality but he was 26 years old when he was drafted, and what is more telling about Poppinga is that with the selection of both Hawk and Hodge, the Packers might have never figured him as more than a special teams contributor, and a role player.

I have already seen alot of contributions from a number of these players, but at the same time was this because these players deserved their playing time because of their talents, or was it because the Packers roster was so piss poor?

[Rastak]

Will Whittaker was a terrible terrible starter....amongst the worst in the NFL

He was a 7th round rookie trying to replace a pro bowl lineman. I'd say those are big shoes for a 7th rounder to handle in his rookie season. Give him a little time and learning and we'll see if he reaches the potential you'd expect out of the bottom of the 7th round.


Calling him one of the worst starters wasn't really a condemnation of Will Whittaker; he did better than we'd expect out of a 7th.

It was a condemnation of Ted Thompson for leaving us in a situation that would necessitate him to start for so many games when he was clearly not ready.


The NFL allows trades also.

I asked this question some weeks ago and don't know that anyone knew the answer so I will try again: When it became apparent that Wahle was not intending on resigning in GB, who on the free agent market was available to replace him?

[Deputy Nutz]

If I remember correctly, the best guards on the market, and the only top tier guys were Rivera and Wahle. It wasn't the best year to have those guys let go by this franchise.

[MadtownPacker]

There is no way the ARod pick can be held against TT!!! :evil: !!! :evil: !

With the 24th pick in the draft and needing to find Favre's replacement ARod fell to TT. He HAD to take him. You just knew he was going to GB when he was still there nearing the 20s.

Was it the right pick? We will find out soon enough but I bet most GMs in the same position would have done the same.

This year TT had the 5th pick and with the whole team needing depth went with what everyone seems to agree was the sure thing in Hawk. He could have had many other players including Vernon Davis which could have potentially made ARod look better when his time comes. He would also have not been viewed as running Favre out of town by going with an offensive weapon. If by some longshot Hawk doesnt turn out to be the sure thing everyone thinks then TT will have blown the 2006 draft pick which took a 4-12 season to get. How many more of those can have if he wants to keep his job?

This years draft will define him, not his rookie one.

[Oscar]

Excellent point Mad. I don't feel TT was in the wrong picking up Rodgers. I wanted him to go D like most but he did the right thing IMHO. I think Coston and Hawkins have the best chance of being starters. Montgomery.. Maby. But he has alot of potential as well and can be an adequate back up DE. Training camp just can't get here soon enough. :smile:

[MJZiggy]

There is no way the ARod pick can be held against TT!!! :evil: !!! :evil: !

With the 24th pick in the draft and needing to find Favre's replacement ARod fell to TT. He HAD to take him. You just knew he was going to GB when he was still there nearing the 20s.

Was it the right pick? We will find out soon enough but I bet most GMs in the same position would have done the same.

This year TT had the 5th pick and with the whole team needing depth went with what everyone seems to agree was the sure thing in Hawk. He could have had many other players including Vernon Davis which could have potentially made ARod look better when his time comes. He would also have not been viewed as running Favre out of town by going with an offensive weapon. If by some longshot Hawk doesnt turn out to be the sure thing everyone thinks then TT will have blown the 2006 draft pick which took a 4-12 season to get. How many more of those can have if he wants to keep his job?

This years draft will define him, not his rookie one.

How could he not pick up A-Rod? At the time, his qb was entering his 15th season with the annual discussion of "should I stay or should I go" and was backed up by Nall who for better or worse, was not viewed as the successor to the throne. That leaves you with a need to draft a qb and the guy who is expected to go #1 or #2 conveniently falls to you while you're feeling you need a qb, you kinda have to take him.

[OKC PackerFan]

They don't have to be all starters, some can be serviceable backups for depth.

1. Rodgers - needs more time to develop, serviceable backup a ?, hopefully not needed until Favre retires and becomes a good QB
2 Collins - starter
4 Poppinga - serviceable backup, possibly starter later in the year SLB
4 Underwood - serviceable backup
5 Hawkins - nickle or dime package, serviceable backup
5 Coston - possible starter, serviceable backup
7 Whittakeer - ?
7 Campbell - ?
7 Montgomery - serviceable backup, DE rotation

That draft looks good to me, 2 maybe 3 starters, 5 decent backups with maybe 2 not making the roster. I think Murphy would have been a #2 or #3 WR. That's 7 out of 11 making the roster and contributing.

[Bretsky]

Will Whittaker was a terrible terrible starter....amongst the worst in the NFL

He was a 7th round rookie trying to replace a pro bowl lineman. I'd say those are big shoes for a 7th rounder to handle in his rookie season. Give him a little time and learning and we'll see if he reaches the potential you'd expect out of the bottom of the 7th round.


Calling him one of the worst starters wasn't really a condemnation of Will Whittaker; he did better than we'd expect out of a 7th.

It was a condemnation of Ted Thompson for leaving us in a situation that would necessitate him to start for so many games when he was clearly not ready.

I asked this question some weeks ago and don't know that anyone knew the answer so I will try again: When it became apparent that Wahle was not intending on resigning in GB, who on the free agent market was available to replace him?

MJ,

That's a bit too much to ask of any of us since that was last year. But I do recall them Wahle was fast out of the gate to sign almost immediately with Carolina.

So there were plenty of options for TT to choose from.

B

[Bretsky]

Every year legit QB's become available for the picking so I won't buy into the argument that we had to take Rodgers when using anything that resembles "need" into the argument.

This year....Brees, Culpepper, Griese. All serviceable or above average guys you could try. Also Schwab was on the trading block.

If Rodgers was just too good to pass up you can go with that theory and I won't argue with you and I will hope you are right in the end.

But I don't see it. I didn't see him as the college player some in here did and I'd have went Defense or OL if anybody worthy was not available on defense.

But you guys all know what I'd have done.

I'd have found some sucker like Cleveland (who took Frye) to trade up to #24 so they could have Rodgers, and use the high 2nd Round Pick for Odell Thurman. And you can certainly bash me for that view.

[MJZiggy]

http://www.theredzone.org/2005/freeagents/showposition.asp?Position=OG

Does this list help? I'm not good at linemen from other teams so don't know who on the list TT would have been able to get/afford. I had always assumed he'd get someone last year and had to trust him as I didn't know the personnel available to him.

[Deputy Nutz]

Mike Pucillo RFA Bills
Billy Yates ERFA Patriots
Stephen Neal RFA Patriots
Joe Andruzzi UFA Patriots
Brandon Moore ERFA Jets
Jonathan Goodwin RFA Jets
Dave Yovanovits RFA Jets
Eric Wilson ERFA Dolphins
Maake Kemoeatu RFA Ravens
Bennie Anderson UFA Ravens
Casey Rabach UFA Ravens
Melvin Fowler RFA Browns
Chad Beasley RFA Browns
Paul Zukauskas UFA Browns
Milford Brown RFA Texans
Rick DeMulling UFA Colts
Tupe Peko UFA Colts
Mike Compton UFA Jaguars
Carlisle Cooper UFA Broncos
Ronald Stone UFA Raiders
Chris Dielman ERFA Chargers
Terence Metcalf RFA Bears
Tyrone Hopson UFA Lions
Marco Rivera UFA Packers
David Dixon UFA Vikings
Anthony Herrera ERFA Vikings
Brandon Newton ERFA Vikings
Blaine Saipaia ERFA Rams
Darnell Alford UFA Rams
Chris Dishman UFA Rams
Tom Nutten UFA Rams
Jeremy Bridges ERFA Cardinals
Cameron Spikes UFA Cardinals
Chris Gray UFA Seahawks
Kyle Kosier RFA 49ers
Eric Heittman RFA 49ers
Rob Murphy UFA 49ers
Martin Bibla RFA Falcons
Michael Moore RFA Falcons
Roberto Garza UFA Falcons
Steve Herndon UFA Falcons
Tutan Reyes RFA Panthers
Rich Tylski UFA Panthers
Cosey Coleman UFA Buccaneers
Ben Noll ERFA Cowboys
Matt Lehr UFA Cowboys
Jermane Mayberry UFA Eagles


Like I said, not a real talented bunch.

[woodbuck27]

"I asked this question some weeks ago and don't know that anyone knew the answer so I will try again: When it became apparent that Wahle was not intending on resigning in GB, who on the free agent market was available to replace him?" MJZiggy


Noone was available to replace what Mike Wahle brought to the table for us.

This man had to stay Ziggy.

[Noodle]

I said this in another post, but will repeat it here -- had we gone with a linebacker in last year's draft with the 1st round pick (I say Ruud, B says Thurman, but you get the point), we could have taken Leinart this year as Favre's replacement. And I think most observers would agree that Leinart is a better prospect than ARod.

But I cut TT the same slack with last year's draft that I cut Sherman. It is hard, hard work when you're picking at the bottom of each round. So I'm not willing to say he's a draft dunce just becaue he hasn't killed it yet with his first draft.

[Bretsky]

A good thought Noodle and even with LB help it's very possible we'd have been drafting in the top 10 this year. I'd rate Leinart as a far better prospect than Rodgers. Cutler as well. TIme will tell.

Hopefully those players develop and Rodgers turns out ok as well.


B

[KYPack]

"I asked this question some weeks ago and don't know that anyone knew the answer so I will try again: When it became apparent that Wahle was not intending on resigning in GB, who on the free agent market was available to replace him?" MJZiggy


Noone was available to replace what Mike Wahle brought to the table for us.

This man had to stay Ziggy.

Cleveland lost both their starting guards that same year.

They signed Joe Andruzzi and Cosey Coleman.

I thought we shudda signed one of those two guys or Pork Chop Womack from Seattle.

Other FA's that would have helped were out there.

A personnel director for an AFC teamsaid he'd take Andruzzi, DeMulling, Anderson, Carlisle, Lehr and Stone over Klemm, for instance.

There were several rookies that should have been picked, I wanted Dan Buenning from Wis. He was a 3rd round pick and became a starter for Tampa.

Coston was the highest guy we picked at a guard. I knew we weren't getting players and missing out on guys that could help at the time it happened. It pissed me off then, & it still does.

[Bretsky]

"I asked this question some weeks ago and don't know that anyone knew the answer so I will try again: When it became apparent that Wahle was not intending on resigning in GB, who on the free agent market was available to replace him?" MJZiggy


Noone was available to replace what Mike Wahle brought to the table for us.

This man had to stay Ziggy.

Cleveland lost both their starting guards that same year.

They signed Joe Andruzzi and Cosey Coleman.

I thought we shudda signed one of those two guys or Pork Chop Womack from Seattle.

Other FA's that would have helped were out there.

A personnel director for an AFC teamsaid he'd take Andruzzi, DeMulling, Anderson, Carlisle, Lehr and Stone over Klemm, for instance.

There were several rookies that should have been picked, I wanted Dan Buenning from Wis. He was a 3rd round pick and became a starter for Tampa.

Coston was the highest guy we picked at a guard. I knew we weren't getting players and missing out on guys that could help at the time it happened. It pissed me off then, & it still does.

GOOD THOGHTS ON ALL OF THIS

[MJZiggy]

Thanks KY. That's the kind of info I was after.

[Bretsky]

Thanks KY. That's the kind of info I was after.


THOSE WERE ALL OK TO DECENT OPTIONS

I'm not sure we have any decent options if the rookies don't pan out this year either.

WITH THE 35MIIL I'D HAVE LIKED AT LEAST ONE DECENT VETERAN OPTION

[MJZiggy]

Ok, B, that's fair enough. Keeping in mind we had no $$ last year, that might explain how we wound up with Klemm, but then let's look at this year. Which guard did you want this offseason?

[Bretsky]

Ok, B, that's fair enough. Keeping in mind we had no $$ last year, that might explain how we wound up with Klemm, but then let's look at this year. Which guard did you want this offseason?

Step Back a minute; some of the guards listed from 2005 came quite cheap so I'm not giving TT a flyer on not covering his bases.

I'll look up the list in 2006; again there were no stars to be had, but there were several decent options that would cover us in case the youngyans bomb.

[OKC PackerFan]

I think TT took a gamble with the guard situation last year, tried to remedy it cheaply and it didn't pan out. With Klemm, he didn't play well as a guard but seems to be a serviceable backup at LT behind Clifton. If you remember last year he did a serviceable job replacing Clifton in the Carolina game.

[swede]

Bretsky--

I can't disagree with much that you've said. I disliked the ARod pick also, even if he eventually proves to be the Trent Dilferesque QB he looks to be developing into, a merely serviceable guy well-suited to a defensive team.

This was not a good draft. There are no "time will tells" about it. I will excuse TT for this somewhat below-average draft by offering a feeble excuse and a conspiracy theory. The feeble excuse is that he was drafting for the first time as GM in Green Bay. The conspiracy theory is that he was engineering Sherman's demise in Green Bay.

I think it was rightly pointed out that Will Whittacker cannot be held responsible for continuing to start despite his poor play. It's not Will Whittacker that signs the talent or picks the starters. Whittacker's being the best option is evidence that TT was not a very good talent GM in 2005. Remember, though, that the sum of his decisions helped put the team on a solid financial footing for the future.

Blue Dawg's Polar Weasel theory is that he didn't intend to be a good talent GM until Sherman was gone.

[hoosier]

I asked this question some weeks ago and don't know that anyone knew the answer so I will try again: When it became apparent that Wahle was not intending on resigning in GB, who on the free agent market was available to replace him?

If memory serves it was Wahle, Rivera and a bunch of nobodies. The difference between Whittaker and some other mediocre player (Cosey Coleman or Rick DeMulling) is meaningless compared to the difference between any of those guys and Wahle. If Thompson decided that he couldn't or shouldn't overpay Wahle and Rivera, I don't see how replacing them with someone other than Whittaker would have made any real diff.

[Bretsky]

I think the differences between Whittaker and some of the Guards on that list, like Andruzzi and Coleman, are dramatic.