Rate the 2008 draft

[channtheman]

Three years later, how do you think this draft has panned out for us?


2 36 Jordy Nelson Wide Receiver 6'3 217 Kansas State
2 56 Brian Brohm Quarterback 6'4 225 Louisville
2 60 Patrick Lee Cornerback 6'0 201 Auburn
3 91 Jermichael Finley Tight End 6'4 243 Texas
4 102 Jeremy Thompson Defensive End 6'4 264 Wake Forest
4 135 Josh Sitton Offensive Guard 6'3 324 Central Florida
5 150 Breno Giacomini Offensive Tackle 6'7 303 Louisville
7 209 Matt Flynn Quarterback 6'2 227 LSU
7 217 Brett Swain Wide Receiver 6'1 200 San Diego State

[HarveyWallbangers]

I looked at the first few names, and thought "not very good." Then, I got to Finley, Sitton, and Flynn. Add Nelson and it's pretty damn good. Probably four starting caliber players with two guys already near the top at their position in the NFL.

[channtheman]

Yeah 6 out of the 9 players we drafted are still on the team. Brohm was a total flop and even though Lee has stuck around he has yet to show much. The fact that we were able to get Finley and Sitton in the 3rd and 4th rounds while our 2nd round picks sucked is why I would never get overly concerned if TT traded away 2nd's to move up into the first (like with Matthews). The point not being that we were able to get Matthews (still such a great pick) but that great and even elite players can be found anywhere in the draft.

[Lurker64]

Finley and Sitton are great players and fantastic value for when they were picked. Flynn and Jordy are good. Lee and Swain are nothing special. It's sort of your quintessential "B+" draft. Could do better if Finley really, really becomes as good as he can be (for us). I think to really net an 'A' you need a true star or two, and Josh Sitton may be the greatest guard ever to put on pads, but he's still an interior lineman.

[Brandon494]

We got two top five players at their position in Finley and Sitton without even having a 1st round pick, you have to be pleased with that.

[Tarlam!]

I just starting a similar thread!! but for this draft class. I'm glad I added the phrase about judging it in three years!!!

I give the 2008 class an A. two starters, maybe three if Jordy replaces Driver. 3-4 major contributors equals a great draft for me.

[Deputy Nutz]

Two starters in Sitton and Finley. Main contributor in Jordy Nelson, but also some lack luster play with Breno, Lee, and Brohm. Good Seventh round.

B grade

[RashanGary]

B+ Finley and Sitton are studs. Nelson is good. Flynn is a nice piece. Normally teams get 8 picks (there are 32 comp picks) so hitting 4 out of 8 is 50%. That's really good. When Ted trades back, I don't think we should punish him on the grade by giving him a lower % hit. If he started with 8 picks and got 4 good players, that's 50% to me.

[Tony Oday]

Are you guys stoned? This is an A draft EASY. JF is a stud TE that creates a real mismatch, not just on paper, on every route, Jordy plays a ton and had 21 catches for 286 yards and 2 TDs in the playoffs...that was as good as our number 1 GJ, Sitton is a road grating stud and starts...thats a good thing. Matt Flynn is regarded as the number 1 backup in the NFL and will yield a 1st rounder if he plays in some mop up and plays like he did against the Pats. So basically we got three starters, yes Jordy is a starter, and a future Matt Shaub esq tradable asset. A

If you DONT think this is an A then there arent many that you would consider an A.

[get louder at lambeau]

I'm with Tony.

[Patler]

So far, this draft has netted just one reliable starter, Sitton, a high potential starter who is more promise than performance due to frequent injuries (Finley); a good third receiver, a backup QB that might bring a low draft choice as FA compensation, and a lingering question in Lee.

So far, that's a "C" with potential extra credit to be submitted this season to raise it to a "B".

You can talk all you want about Finley's potential, which I will not argue with, but the fact is he has just 82 career receptions after three years. So far, that's not huge contribution. If TT pulls the trigger and trades Flynn for a fourth or higher this year, that's a plus for the draft; but if Flynn leaves as a FA and the Packers get just a 6th or 7th, it doesn't count much.

There has not been huge production from this draft yet, but there are still possibilities.

[Tony Oday]

Sitton is a starter
Jordy is a starter in a league that runs 3 WR all the time
Finley did not start as a rookie had 55 catches his 2nd year and got dinged last year. Still a starter and will not have to compete for it in camp so I dont see the problem with labeling him as a starter
Flynn will be traded for MUCH more than a 4th. If Ponder is drafted in the 1st Flynn is worth a third AT LEAST.
Pat Lee and Swain have both contributed in small ways for the past three years.

My criteria for a draft to be successful is:
1 starter
3 contributers
2 potential

Out of this draft we had:
2 Starter/ Top 10 at their position
1 Starter that took a leap in the playoffs last year
2 contributers
1 potential

I have this as an A grade because of the fact we got two top 10 at their positions.

[Patler]

Sitton is a starter
Jordy is a starter in a league that runs 3 WR all the time
Finley did not start as a rookie had 55 catches his 2nd year and got dinged last year. Still a starter and will not have to compete for it in camp so I dont see the problem with labeling him as a starter
Flynn will be traded for MUCH more than a 4th. If Ponder is drafted in the 1st Flynn is worth a third AT LEAST.
Pat Lee and Swain have both contributed in small ways for the past three years.

My criteria for a draft to be successful is:
1 starter
3 contributers
2 potential

Out of this draft we had:
2 Starter/ Top 10 at their position
1 Starter that took a leap in the playoffs last year
2 contributers
1 potential

I have this as an A grade because of the fact we got two top 10 at their positions.

I think your criteria for a successful draft is much, much too low. At the rate of 1 starter, 3 contributors and 2 potential, you will never complete a starting roster, especially if you call Nelson a "starter". If the third WR is a starter, and the 3rd corner, you have to fill in 24 starting spots plus a kicker, punter and snapper. You need to find three of those each year just to keep it going. That would be a "C" in my grade book, an "average" year of filling spots.

I like what Finley might become very much. I'm just not certain he will get there, and if he does, it might not be as a Packer.

[Tarlam!]

I like what Finley might become very much. I'm just not certain he will get there, and if he does, it might not be as a Packer.

I hate the message, I love the messenger.

[Patler]

Flynn will be traded for MUCH more than a 4th. If Ponder is drafted in the 1st Flynn is worth a third AT LEAST.

When will that happen?
I think the Packers are in a sticky situation with Flynn. Clearly they have SB aspirations for 2011. Last year taught them that backup QBs really do have to play sometime. They almost have to keep Flynn this year, or find another capable backup. If they do keep Flynn, he will leave as a FA, and they will be lucky to get a 4th in compensation.

[Tony Oday]

This would be the year to trade him to be honest. Fourth year guy ala Matt Shaub to the Texans...I think we could get similar compensation.

[Tony Oday]

http://www.packers.com/team/howbuilt.html

Just to see how we are built.

[Brandon494]

So far, this draft has netted just one reliable starter, Sitton, a high potential starter who is more promise than performance due to frequent injuries (Finley); a good third receiver, a backup QB that might bring a low draft choice as FA compensation, and a lingering question in Lee.

So far, that's a "C" with potential extra credit to be submitted this season to raise it to a "B".

You can talk all you want about Finley's potential, which I will not argue with, but the fact is he has just 82 career receptions after three years. So far, that's not huge contribution. If TT pulls the trigger and trades Flynn for a fourth or higher this year, that's a plus for the draft; but if Flynn leaves as a FA and the Packers get just a 6th or 7th, it doesn't count much.

There has not been huge production from this draft yet, but there are still possibilities.

Only a C? You do understand we didnt even have a 1st round draft pick right?

Sitton is more than just a reliable starter, he is a top 5 RG in the league. I know your a stats guy and all but even Stevie Wonder can see that Finley is a top 5 TE in the league. He missed 3 games in 09 then had a freak injury trying to make a tackle last season. I dont really see that as him being injury phone and just more as bad luck. Jordy is a reliable #3 reciever on a loaded recieving core and Fylnn is considered one of the best young backup QBs in the league, although he is no where near as good as Shaub. So we hit on 4 out of 9 without having a 1st round draft pick. To me to be able to get two pro bowl caliber players without having a #1 pick is pretty damn good and I'd give this class a B+.

[Patler]

Only a C? You do understand we didnt even have a 1st round draft pick right?

Sitton is more than just a reliable starter, he is a top 5 RG in the league. I know your a stats guy and all but even Stevie Wonder can see that Finley is a top 5 TE in the league. He missed 3 games in 09 then had a freak injury trying to make a tackle last season. I dont really see that as him being injury phone and just more as bad luck. Jordy is a reliable #3 reciever on a loaded recieving core and Fylnn is considered one of the best young backup QBs in the league, although he is no where near as good as Shaub. So we hit on 4 out of 9 without having a 1st round draft pick. To me to be able to get two pro bowl caliber players without having a #1 pick is pretty damn good and I'd give this class a B+.

They had no 1st because TT decided to trade it. His choice to increase quantity while lowering position. He doesn't get lower expectations because of that.

It doesn't matter where they are picked, the draft should be evaluated based on the performance of the players. After three years, that should be actual performance, not some potential they have, or what they might do if they stay healthy. If they aren't starters by now, most won't ever be anything more than an average starter at best, unless they are at a position of unusual depth, or someone like Rodgers behind a HOFer.

As for Sitton, I meant "reliable" as dependable to be there week in and week out. Didn't mean it as quality of play. Sorry if I wasn't clear. I readily admit he is one of the better guards in the league.

Freak injury for Finley? I don't know, that's how many major injuries occur, you get hit while in a compromised position. The big question now is, will there be any lasting effects from it, and from the second surgery that was needed to clean out the infection? Might it alter his career? It wouldn't be the first time. Two years as a starter, injuries each year to take games away. Missing three games in 2009 is not a minor thing either. It could be the start of a pattern, or maybe not.

Until Finley plays more than just a handful of games as one of the best in the league, he is really just potential. His 13 games in 2009 don't make a career. Until someone else besides Sitton becomes an actual starter performing with consistency week after week, Sitton is the only illuminated bright light from the draft. The rest are flickering.

[Guiness]

I'm not as harsh as Patler, I think a B to B+. The draft really makes or breaks on Finley. Don't let draft pedigree colour your perception. If we'd taken Sitton or Finley as our first rounder we'd be calling the draft a great success!

Sure you'd like every player you draft to be a starter, but the fact that 6 of the 9 players are still with the team is great. I'd say there were 2-3 starters in this draft. If we go to camp this fall, Sitton and Finley are starters, and it's not an invalid argument that the 3rd WR is a starter.

On top of that, I know we haven't gotten a lot out of Lee until now, but his SB performance was good, and bodes well. In Swain we got a player that lasts 4-5 years and contributes on ST - out of a 7th rounder, it's hard to complain about that! Flynn has provided important depth and fills a critical spot...also out of a 7th rounder.

If we didn't consider draft location, would we be happier with it? If Flynn was a 2nd round choice, and our 7th rounder didn't pan out?

[Guiness]

http://www.packers.com/team/howbuilt.html

Just to see how we are built.

I don't agree with some of the classification on that list. To say our team is made up of 31 FA's is misleading. When I hear FA I think of a guy who played in the league, and was picked up after being released or playing out his contract, not guys you got as UDFA's. That has a lot more to do with scouting and identifying college talent. Jenkins, Tramon, Zombo, Shields and many more fit into that category.

Without looking to far into the history of a lot of the players (pretty much everyone we picked up this year!) I'd say we have 10 or so players we got from Free Agency.

[Tony Oday]

Just because they werent multi million dollar busts does not make them NOT free agents.

[BobDobbs]

For those that think that C is too harsh a grade think about all the guys that suck from this draft. It's OK that Giacomini sucks and maybe Thompson, you miss a couple. But Lee and Brohm were both second round picks, they suck. Over the years we've gotten Jennings, Collins, Mike Neal, and Brandon Jackson out of the second round. That year we had three picks and basically ended up with Jordy Nelson. Very Bad performance. The amount of guys we got nothing from in this draft is really high.

If you give this draft an A what are you going to give 2009? You're going to need a new alphabet.

Realistically though, they did hit on Finley. He need to produce to bring the grade up, but if this draft is redone today he goes WAY higher even if teams know he's going to miss a season to injury. Flynn also helps to save the QB pick, lucky or good I don't know. In all honesty I give an incomplete because Finley is so important to the fate of this draft. It's a B- with a chance to raise to a B if Finley can actually stay healthy and dominate.

[Patler]

I'm not as harsh as Patler, I think a B to B+. The draft really makes or breaks on Finley. Don't let draft pedigree colour your perception. If we'd taken Sitton or Finley as our first rounder we'd be calling the draft a great success!

Sure you'd like every player you draft to be a starter, but the fact that 6 of the 9 players are still with the team is great. I'd say there were 2-3 starters in this draft. If we go to camp this fall, Sitton and Finley are starters, and it's not an invalid argument that the 3rd WR is a starter.

On top of that, I know we haven't gotten a lot out of Lee until now, but his SB performance was good, and bodes well. In Swain we got a player that lasts 4-5 years and contributes on ST - out of a 7th rounder, it's hard to complain about that! Flynn has provided important depth and fills a critical spot...also out of a 7th rounder.

If we didn't consider draft location, would we be happier with it? If Flynn was a 2nd round choice, and our 7th rounder didn't pan out?

I think we are in about the same place. I did say that extra credit this year could move it to a "B". :grin: If Nelson and Finley continue as hoped, Lee contributes, etc. I think it becomes a solid "B", but that isn't certain.

The make up of the NFL today is such that very seldom do the top four or 5 round picks not hang around for at least about 3 years. So this becomes a make-or-break year for guys like Lee and Swain. If both are released this year in favor of the new guys; Finley is in and out due to his knee, or is hurt again; and Flynn sticks around through the season, leaves as a FA and the Packers get a 5th or 6th round pick; is this draft anything more than a "C"?

When a team relies on the draft as much as the Packers, an average year has to bring in 2-3 who become starters. That makes it a "C" in my book. If the starters are better than average starters, and/or you have more than three who become starters, and/or you also have a a few key reserves or role-players from the draft, it becomes a "B". If it includes players who become pro-bowl players or are otherwise truly special players, it becomes an "A".

[Lurker64]

Patler, you've talked me down to a B, I'm willing to move it to a B+ with good years from Finley and Nelson.

I've actually believed for a while now that "it takes three years to grade a draft" is insufficiently conservative. I think four is a better measure, for precisely the reason that you're outlying. So we can now go back and grade the 2007 draft, which I believe has earned a "blech".

[Patler]

For those that think that C is too harsh a grade think about all the guys that suck from this draft. It's OK that Giacomini sucks and maybe Thompson, you miss a couple. But Lee and Brohm were both second round picks, they suck. Over the years we've gotten Jennings, Collins, Mike Neal, and Brandon Jackson out of the second round. That year we had three picks and basically ended up with Jordy Nelson. Very Bad performance. The amount of guys we got nothing from in this draft is really high.

If you give this draft an A what are you going to give 2009? You're going to need a new alphabet.

Realistically though, they did hit on Finley. He need to produce to bring the grade up, but if this draft is redone today he goes WAY higher even if teams know he's going to miss a season to injury. Flynn also helps to save the QB pick, lucky or good I don't know. In all honesty I give an incomplete because Finley is so important to the fate of this draft. It's a B- with a chance to raise to a B if Finley can actually stay healthy and dominate.

You said it better than I did, especially the "incomplete" due to Finley.

[RashanGary]

I'd like you to find someone who had an A draft, Patler. Your scale seems a little tough.

[Patler]

Patler, you've talked me down to a B, I'm willing to move it to a B+ with good years from Finley and Nelson.

I've actually believed for a while now that "it takes three years to grade a draft" is insufficiently conservative. I think four is a better measure, for precisely the reason that you're outlying. So we can now go back and grade the 2007 draft, which I believe has earned a "blech".

With the standard 4 year contract and free agency (pre-2010), the best evaluator of a draft might be to look at how many the team really tries to sign to a second contract. From 2007, it might be just Bishop and Crosby.

[Lurker64]

I'd like you to find someone who had an A draft, Patler. Your scale seems a little tough.

Assuming that TJ Lang starts at LG this year and plays well, 2009 looks like an 'A'.


With the standard 4 year contract and free agency (pre-2010), the best evaluator of a draft might be to look at how many the team really tries to sign to a second contract. From 2007, it might be just Bishop and Crosby.

I think this is a good method, but it takes significantly more work than "eyeballing it" such that only people who follow a team are really well positioned to grade a draft, but that might the case anyway.

[Patler]

I'd like you to find someone who had an A draft, Patler. Your scale seems a little tough.

I don't know other teams rosters well enough to do that.

If you are content with just 1 or 2 starters from a draft, where are the other starters supposed to come from? You need 22 starters + 3 specialists, and some want to consider the the third WR and the third CB as well. That's fine. However, you have to turn your starting roster over in about 10 years. 27 players every 10 years, 2-3 per year would be what you have to do on average. Average = "C". (I grade tough, there aren't a lot of "A"s in my classes!)

As I said, if Finley actually plays to the level expected and Nelson stays, this gives them their 3 for a "C" which can get upped to a "B" for quality performances by Sitton and Finley. But as of right now? What has Finley actually accomplished? He has given us a taste of his potential, but that is about it.

[Guiness]

I think we are in about the same place. I did say that extra credit this year could move it to a "B". :grin: If Nelson and Finley continue as hoped, Lee contributes, etc. I think it becomes a solid "B", but that isn't certain.

The make up of the NFL today is such that very seldom do the top four or 5 round picks not hang around for at least about 3 years. So this becomes a make-or-break year for guys like Lee and Swain. If both are released this year in favor of the new guys; Finley is in and out due to his knee, or is hurt again; and Flynn sticks around through the season, leaves as a FA and the Packers get a 5th or 6th round pick; is this draft anything more than a "C"?

When a team relies on the draft as much as the Packers, an average year has to bring in 2-3 who become starters. That makes it a "C" in my book. If the starters are better than average starters, and/or you have more than three who become starters, and/or you also have a a few key reserves or role-players from the draft, it becomes a "B". If it includes players who become pro-bowl players or are otherwise truly special players, it becomes an "A".

It becomes difficult, you almost have to 'freeze' a moment in time and decide on a grade at that point. It's hard to do that now, because there are unknowns coming out of the end of last season. But I still think right now it's at least a B. Finley and Sitton are both top 5 players at their position. Hard to complain about that.

Realistically, look at it at the end of TC. If (if, if, if!) Nelson is the #2 or #3, Finley looks as good as ever, and Lee is the KR/dime back (I'm assuming Sitton just keeps on keeping on!) it's a very good draft.

I don't think losing Flynn after next season (notice I didn't say next year...) for a 5th or 6th is horrible. We hope that TT can wangle more out of him that that, but if we can 'preserve' the 7th round pick for a few years, or even upgrade it a round or two, that's pretty good.

[mraynrand]

I don't know other teams rosters well enough to do that.

If you are content with just 1 or 2 starters from a draft, where are the other starters supposed to come from? You need 22 starters + 3 specialists, and some want to consider the the third WR and the third CB as well. That's fine. However, you have to turn your starting roster over in about 10 years. 27 players every 10 years, 2-3 per year would be what you have to do on average. Average = "C". (I grade tough, there aren't a lot of "A"s in my classes!)

As I said, if Finley actually plays to the level expected and Nelson stays, this gives them their 3 for a "C" which can get upped to a "B" for quality performances by Sitton and Finley. But as of right now? What has Finley actually accomplished? He has given us a taste of his potential, but that is about it.

I would agree with you if you only got players from the draft. Even the draft-heavy TT fields a lot of FAs, either as rookies or off the scrap heap - especially this past year - e.g. Shields, Walden, Green....

Even so, I see the 2008 draft as a B, B+ too, just because you don't yet know. Drafts are much easier to evaluate 10-15 years later. In any case, they can be hard to evaluate in isolation due to weird circumstances. Take the 1999 draft - what do you say about #2 Fred Vinson - he was injured and ended up sucking in the NFL, but the Packers traded him to get Ahman Green. Brooks did nothing for the Packers, but had a few good years as QB in the NFL. Plus the draft netted one of the all-time Packer enigmas, Ole' Cleedeeus. Just for entertainment value, that was a great pick, IMO. Even scientists I think would say not to get all scientific about this stuff. It's crazy and variable - a reflection of the personalities that inhabit the NFL....

[Patler]

Assuming that TJ Lang starts at LG this year and plays well, 2009 looks like an 'A'.

2000 was pretty good for the Packers, too; with Franks, Clifton, KGB, Diggs and Tauscher.

1995 brought Newsome, Henderson, Williams, Freeman, Timmerman, Jervey and Holland.

I think 2010 might turn out pretty good.

[mraynrand]

2000 was pretty good for the Packers, too; with Franks, Clifton, KGB, Diggs and Tauscher.

Those draft picks, plus the trade for Green, is what kept GB competitive for 5 more years. The Hass trade to get Reynolds the next year is what brought about the finish for the Pre-Stubby GB Packers.

[Patler]

I think most of the differences I have with those of you who want to give it an "A" or "B" revolves around Finley. Those of you who rate the draft the highest say Finley IS a star. I think he CAN BE a star, but so far isn't. He did little of nothing in 2008, had a coming out party in 2009, then essentially missed 2010. I can't rate the draft as if he played 2010 the way we think he might have if he hadn't been injured; nor can I assume the injury will have no residual impact on his play or that he will not continue to get injured.

I'll stick with my "C", with the possibility of a higher grade from "extra credit" in 2011 if Nelson continues ascending, Finley returns in top form and/or the light has gone on for Lee.

[Scott Campbell]

Are you guys stoned? This is an A draft EASY.


+1

[Patler]

I would agree with you if you only got players from the draft. Even the draft-heavy TT fields a lot of FAs, either as rookies or off the scrap heap - especially this past year - e.g. Shields, Walden, Green....

Even so, I see the 2008 draft as a B, B+ too, just because you don't yet know. Drafts are much easier to evaluate 10-15 years later. In any case, they can be hard to evaluate in isolation due to weird circumstances. Take the 1999 draft - what do you say about #2 Fred Vinson - he was injured and ended up sucking in the NFL, but the Packers traded him to get Ahman Green. Brooks did nothing for the Packers, but had a few good years as QB in the NFL. Plus the draft netted one of the all-time Packer enigmas, Ole' Cleedeeus. Just for entertainment value, that was a great pick, IMO. Even scientists I think would say not to get all scientific about this stuff. It's crazy and variable - a reflection of the personalities that inhabit the NFL....

Sometimes you "hit" with a FA because you failed with a draft pick. If Lee had played like a 2nd round corner is hoped, maybe they would not have been so hot after Shields. If Thompson and/or Jones were successful and not injured, Zombo might never have made the team. If Wynn, Harrell, Neal were better and/or healthy, Green would never have seen Green Bay.

If you look at total rookie acquisitions, 2010 might turn out to be really special.

[mraynrand]

All good points Patler, but the Packers aren't the only team that does this. Teams with poorer drafting have to bring in more guys. I've done this analysis before, that is, directly comparing two or three teams over a stretch of several years. Here's my basic point: no team builds exclusively through the draft, so that I simply dispute the exact number you use for how many draft picks have to pan out. If you reduce the starters required from 2-3 number to 1-2 or 1.5 to 2.5, the 2008 draft might all the sudden look a lot better - especially after 10-15 years, after which you can look at things like productivity, pro bowls, trades, etc.

The other thing you can't ignore is draft position. For example, 2006 was an especially rich year due to the poor 2005 showing, being at the top of the draft order each round - and of course an extra #2 from Walker. Things like that complicate the whole thing to the point of Baseball proportions.

[Bretsky]

Sitton- Stud
Finley- Stud
Nelson- Starter capable

I'd give TT on A on this one

[Patler]

All good points Patler, but the Packers aren't the only team that does this. Teams with poorer drafting have to bring in more guys. I've done this analysis before, that is, directly comparing two or three teams over a stretch of several years. Here's my basic point: no team builds exclusively through the draft, so that I simply dispute the exact number you use for how many draft picks have to pan out. If you reduce the starters required from 2-3 number to 1-2 or 1.5 to 2.5, the 2008 draft might all the sudden look a lot better - especially after 10-15 years, after which you can look at things like productivity, pro bowls, trades, etc.

The other thing you can't ignore is draft position. For example, 2006 was an especially rich year due to the poor 2005 showing, being at the top of the draft order each round - and of course an extra #2 from Walker. Things like that complicate the whole thing to the point of Baseball proportions.

But two each year only gives you 20 in a 10 year period. Plenty of space for the FA signings.

[Patler]

Sitton- Stud
Finley- Stud
Nelson- Starter capable

I'd give TT on A on this one

Than what do you give for a draft with 4 or 5 starters?
Finley is a stud or can be one, assuming he stays on the field?

[Bretsky]

I think the goal of each draft would be to get three starters and some depth; I'd probably give somebody categorized as a stud double value
Most drafts don't bring two stars at their position or five starters. If they do I'd give that an A also

One could easily argue I overvalue Finley and Jordan, which would probably bring it to the B range if you don't view Finley as a stud and Nelson as a starter

[Patler]

I think the goal of each draft would be to get three starters and some depth; I'd probably give somebody categorized as a stud double value
Most drafts don't bring two stars at their position or five starters. If they do I'd give that an A also

One could easily argue I overvalue Finley and Jordan, which would probably bring it to the B range if you don't view Finley as a stud and Nelson as a starter

We are not that far apart. I look at Sitton as the only proven commodity. Nelson has shown flashes. I truly do worry about Finley staying healthy. He tends to run relatively tall, and constantly takes shoulders into his lower legs. As I recall, that is how he got hurt in 2009. Now that he has a repaired knee..... I also wonder if he will be 100% in 2011.

[Kiwon]

Given that TT already has a Super Bowl victory under his belt his reputation as a superior Draft manager has an added glean to that luster. No matter how his career ends with the Packers he will have his choice of teams looking at him as someone who can rebuild them successfully from the ground up.

[bobblehead]

I think your criteria for a successful draft is much, much too low. At the rate of 1 starter, 3 contributors and 2 potential, you will never complete a starting roster, especially if you call Nelson a "starter". If the third WR is a starter, and the 3rd corner, you have to fill in 24 starting spots plus a kicker, punter and snapper. You need to find three of those each year just to keep it going. That would be a "C" in my grade book, an "average" year of filling spots.

I like what Finley might become very much. I'm just not certain he will get there, and if he does, it might not be as a Packer.

So you don't think TT is actually that good with the draft since most of his drafts have fallen short of this.

[bobblehead]

They had no 1st because TT decided to trade it. His choice to increase quantity while lowering position. He doesn't get lower expectations because of that.

It doesn't matter where they are picked, the draft should be evaluated based on the performance of the players. After three years, that should be actual performance, not some potential they have, or what they might do if they stay healthy. If they aren't starters by now, most won't ever be anything more than an average starter at best, unless they are at a position of unusual depth, or someone like Rodgers behind a HOFer.

As for Sitton, I meant "reliable" as dependable to be there week in and week out. Didn't mean it as quality of play. Sorry if I wasn't clear. I readily admit he is one of the better guards in the league.

Freak injury for Finley? I don't know, that's how many major injuries occur, you get hit while in a compromised position. The big question now is, will there be any lasting effects from it, and from the second surgery that was needed to clean out the infection? Might it alter his career? It wouldn't be the first time. Two years as a starter, injuries each year to take games away. Missing three games in 2009 is not a minor thing either. It could be the start of a pattern, or maybe not.

Until Finley plays more than just a handful of games as one of the best in the league, he is really just potential. His 13 games in 2009 don't make a career. Until someone else besides Sitton becomes an actual starter performing with consistency week after week, Sitton is the only illuminated bright light from the draft. The rest are flickering.

Also you are holding an injury against the guy who drafted him.....how do you draft guys that never get injured??

[mraynrand]

All good points Patler, but the Packers aren't the only team that does this. Teams with poorer drafting have to bring in more guys. I've done this analysis before, that is, directly comparing two or three teams over a stretch of several years. Here's my basic point: no team builds exclusively through the draft, so that I simply dispute the exact number you use for how many draft picks have to pan out. If you reduce the starters required from 2-3 number to 1-2 or 1.5 to 2.5, the 2008 draft might all the sudden look a lot better - especially after 10-15 years, after which you can look at things like productivity, pro bowls, trades, etc.

The other thing you can't ignore is draft position. For example, 2006 was an especially rich year due to the poor 2005 showing, being at the top of the draft order each round - and of course an extra #2 from Walker. Things like that complicate the whole thing to the point of Baseball proportions.


But two each year only gives you 20 in a 10 year period. Plenty of space for the FA signings.

Indeed. I didn't do any comprehensive search through the rosters of NFL teams, but I would bet that a significant percentage of those rosters are comprised of FAs compared to internal draft picks. Maybe even the best internally drafting teams like Pittsburgh and GB get by on no more than 2 starters/draft. If I have nothing to do this weekend, I'll investigate - unless you beat me to it.

[sharpe1027]

Until Finley plays more than just a handful of games as one of the best in the league, he is really just potential. His 13 games in 2009 don't make a career. Until someone else besides Sitton becomes an actual starter performing with consistency week after week, Sitton is the only illuminated bright light from the draft. The rest are flickering.

I disagree that Finley is "just potential." I think I understand your point about injuries, but I look at it this way: if Rodgers were to have a career ending injury next week, I would not say that he was "just potential" because two years "don't make a career." Sure, Rodgers has played more games, but IMO the standard should not be whether or not a player has proved to have made a career. In my mind, Finley has shown by objective and reasonable measures that he is an outstanding TE.

[3irty1]

Well the best draft class in history is probably the 1974 draft by the Steelers:
21) Lynn Swan, WR, USC - Hall of Famer
46) Jack Lambert, LB, Kent State - Hall of Famer
82) John Stallworth, WR, Alabama A&M - Hall of Famer
125) Mike Webster, C, Wisconsin - Hall of Famer

So if that is 100% then I'd give the Packers 2008 draft maybe a 60% which is a D-.

[Iron Mike]

Are you guys stoned?

Totally. Are you ready to whale down some carne asada with 10-12 Negra Modelos???

[bobblehead]

We are not that far apart. I look at Sitton as the only proven commodity. Nelson has shown flashes. I truly do worry about Finley staying healthy. He tends to run relatively tall, and constantly takes shoulders into his lower legs. As I recall, that is how he got hurt in 2009. Now that he has a repaired knee..... I also wonder if he will be 100% in 2011.

One last point I'll make on this thread Patler. You are downgrading the draft because of injury, or TT's performance in the draft because of injury. This is a huge difference as TT identified the talent and got it, but there would have been no way to identify Finley as an injury risk. One could argue that Harrell could have been pegged, even Jeremy Thompson I guess (though no one see's that disease until it hits), but finley? Nothing suggested injury, but we all agree that when healthy he is a game changer.

So, that being said, I give TT an A for landing two STUDS at their position with other contributors, but the draft itself will get downgraded due to Finley's health thus far.

[bobblehead]

I disagree that Finley is "just potential." I think I understand your point about injuries, but I look at it this way: if Rodgers were to have a career ending injury next week, I would not say that he was "just potential" because two years "don't make a career." Sure, Rodgers has played more games, but IMO the standard should not be whether or not a player has proved to have made a career. In my mind, Finley has shown by objective and reasonable measures that he is an outstanding TE.

This is also a good point and brings up another. Is the draft determined by "starters" drafted? If so, TT has a tough job since he has fielded a great team. A GM who has drafted miserably has an easier time drafting starters to replace his past bad drafts where as TT can't draft a starter in Jordy because he did too fucking good of a job nabbing Greg Jennings years earlier.

I will grade this draft based on talent aquired. He fucked up the Lee and Brohm picks, but he did draft at least 4 guys that will start in the NFL eventually and likely could start on several teams....5 if you count Jones which I won't at this point even though he started for us. I love Lang, Sitton, Finley, and Jordy. I also think Flynn will be a 10 year NFL player. Jones the jury is out on, but he flashed some talent. This is 5-6 NFL quality players from one draft and that might not be an A, but its not a C either when you add in the game changing ability of Sitton and Finley.

[get louder at lambeau]

Totally. Are you ready to whale down some carne asada with 10-12 Negra Modelos???

I grew up in Fonja Lac. There ain't no goddamn carne asada in Fonja Lac. Besides that, I'm in.

[Packman_26]

I'm not a big fan of rating a draft based on the number of starters you get. Its not like if a team has a really bad GM they are only going to start 21 guys. Every team starts the same amount of players. Getting a starter on the Packers or Steelers is much harder than the Panthers or Bills. Also having other good draft classes will hurt you by this standard.
Plus, some draft classes are more talented than others. I don't think we should punish Thompson for not drafting a Clay Matthews in 2008. There wasn't a Matthews-type player there. It could be argued that TT should have taken DeSean Jackson instead of Nelson, but that type of thinking would lead you to believe there aren't any good GMs.
I think the best way to judge a draft class is to consider how the draft would look if you could do the whole thing over again. What round would guys like Finley, Sitton, and Flynn go if that draft were held today?
I say its an A.

[Packman_26]

This is also a good point and brings up another. Is the draft determined by "starters" drafted? If so, TT has a tough job since he has fielded a great team. A GM who has drafted miserably has an easier time drafting starters to replace his past bad drafts where as TT can't draft a starter in Jordy because he did too fucking good of a job nabbing Greg Jennings years earlier.

I will grade this draft based on talent aquired. He fucked up the Lee and Brohm picks, but he did draft at least 4 guys that will start in the NFL eventually and likely could start on several teams....5 if you count Jones which I won't at this point even though he started for us. I love Lang, Sitton, Finley, and Jordy. I also think Flynn will be a 10 year NFL player. Jones the jury is out on, but he flashed some talent. This is 5-6 NFL quality players from one draft and that might not be an A, but its not a C either when you add in the game changing ability of Sitton and Finley.
Damn, you scooped me. Good job.

[Fritz]

Patler, I think you're being a little tough here. I just looked over some of Ron Wolf's drafts, and he had what looked like a number of duds - though every draft seemed to produce at least one or two reasonable players. But it's not like every draft was stellar - most of them don't look that great. But he got a SB out of it.

And check out this stellar 1986 draft. Who was in charge back then, anyway? Pee Wee Herman? I recall Tim Harris as being good, but the rest? How'd Robbie Bosco work out? How's this draft get graded?

1986 1 2 14 41 Kenneth Davis RB Texas Christian
2 3 17 72 Robbie Bosco QB Brigham Young
3 4 2 84 Tim Harris DE Memphis State
4 4 16 98 Dan Knight T San Diego State
5 5 15 125 Matt Koart DT USC
6 6 5 143 Burnell Dent LB Tulane
7 7 17 183 Ed Berry DB Utah State
8 8 16 210 Michael Cline DT Arkansas State
9 9 15 236 Brent Moore

[Iron Mike]

I grew up in Fonja Lac. There ain't no goddamn carne asada in Fonja Lac. Besides that, I'm in.

Oh, I beg to differ. There's Mazatlan on 6th and Main, Casa Mexico on 45 and Scott St., Sombreros on Pioneer Road and La Tapatia on Johnson Street. I think you can even get tortas at the former Taco John's.

[Patler]

One last point I'll make on this thread Patler. You are downgrading the draft because of injury, or TT's performance in the draft because of injury. This is a huge difference as TT identified the talent and got it, but there would have been no way to identify Finley as an injury risk. One could argue that Harrell could have been pegged, even Jeremy Thompson I guess (though no one see's that disease until it hits), but finley? Nothing suggested injury, but we all agree that when healthy he is a game changer.

So, that being said, I give TT an A for landing two STUDS at their position with other contributors, but the draft itself will get downgraded due to Finley's health thus far.

I have never downgraded a GM because of a player's injury. No way of predicting those. But we aren't rating TT here, we are rating the effect of the 2008 draft, no? The impact of that draft on the team. The question was:


Three years later, how do you think this draft has panned out for us?

For example, I think Murphy was a good pick in 2005, but his impact on the team was 0. If I were evaluating TT's performance, I would not downgrade him for picking Murphy, but Murphy didn't "pan out" at all.

I for one do not think Harrell was a bad pick, he just hasn't panned out at all. I do not criticize TT for picking him, but he has meant nothing to the Packers so far. The impact of that draft may be low, but not because TT did a poor job necessarily.

That's why I'm lukewarm on Finley as he relates to this thread. I think he was a great pick for where he was taken, but so far he has had only a moderate impact on the team. I think it can be argued that Nelson has had as much or even more impact than Finley has had. As for their potential? Finley by a landslide, but we aren't rating potential, are we? If he doesn't have a good year in 2011 and leaves in the off season, he won't have "panned out" all that well for the Packers.

Maybe that's why so many disagree so strongly with me. I am looking at actual impact and others are looking more to the future. As I have said over and over, I would give that draft a "C" for now, but have acknowledged it could move much higher depending on where the future takes Finley and Nelson, and if they get something from the pick of Flynn.

I think a GM can have a great draft that just doesn't pan out due to injury.

[get louder at lambeau]

Oh, I beg to differ. There's Mazatlan on 6th and Main, Casa Mexico on 45 and Scott St., Sombreros on Pioneer Road and La Tapatia on Johnson Street. I think you can even get tortas at the former Taco John's.

Well, I guess I haven't lived there for over 10 years. I think the only one of those that existed back when I lived there was the one on W. Scott, but it was probably a different owner and different name back then. Taco John's is closed? Is the Mad Hatter closed too?

[Guiness]

Also you are holding an injury against the guy who drafted him.....how do you draft guys that never get injured??


I have never downgraded a GM because of a player's injury. No way of predicting those. But we aren't rating TT here, we are rating the effect of the 2008 draft, no? The impact of that draft on the team. The question was:

Three years later, how do you think this draft has panned out for us?



I agree with Patler on this. We're talking about the effect of a pick on the team. I don't hold a player's injury against the person who drafted him, but if didn't contribute, he didn't contribute.

Coulda woulda shoulda doesn't win games. That's Rex Ryan territory, the Jets coulda beat us in the SB, right?

A team made up of good (or potentially good) players doesn't get us anywhere. Murphy, Thompson, Ki-Jana Carter and, I don't know, Ponder or Pennington. Let's throw in Kellen Winslow, who has started 16 games once in a seven year career...

[sharpe1027]

That's why I'm lukewarm on Finley as he relates to this thread. I think he was a great pick for where he was taken, but so far he has had only a moderate impact on the team. I think it can be argued that Nelson has had as much or even more impact than Finley has had. As for their potential? Finley by a landslide, but we aren't rating potential, are we? If he doesn't have a good year in 2011 and leaves in the off season, he won't have "panned out" all that well for the Packers.

Maybe that's why so many disagree so strongly with me. I am looking at actual impact and others are looking more to the future. As I have said over and over, I would give that draft a "C" for now, but have acknowledged it could move much higher depending on where the future takes Finley and Nelson, and if they get something from the pick of Flynn.

I think a GM can have a great draft that just doesn't pan out due to injury.

I agree with analyzing the draft that way.

I would like to point out that the drop off between the Nelson playing and not playing vs. Finley playing and not playing is not that close. Nelson was active for many games that you had to try hard even to notice him. Finely jumped off the screen in almost every game. Nelson's contribution in total number might be greater than Finley, but I think Nelson's contribution is more easily picked up by other players. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'd rather have Finely for five games than Nelson for sixteen.

[get louder at lambeau]

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'd rather have Finely for five games than Nelson for sixteen.

Not me. We just won the Super Bowl without Finley. We probably wouldn't have won the Super Bowl without Jordy. He had Finley-like numbers in the postseason this year-

Divisional @ATL 8 catches for 79 yards and a TD
Conference @CHI 4 catches for 67 yards
Super Bowl v. PIT 9 catches for 140 yards and a TD

[bobblehead]

I have never downgraded a GM because of a player's injury. No way of predicting those. But we aren't rating TT here, we are rating the effect of the 2008 draft, no? The impact of that draft on the team. The question was:



For example, I think Murphy was a good pick in 2005, but his impact on the team was 0. If I were evaluating TT's performance, I would not downgrade him for picking Murphy, but Murphy didn't "pan out" at all.

I for one do not think Harrell was a bad pick, he just hasn't panned out at all. I do not criticize TT for picking him, but he has meant nothing to the Packers so far. The impact of that draft may be low, but not because TT did a poor job necessarily.

That's why I'm lukewarm on Finley as he relates to this thread. I think he was a great pick for where he was taken, but so far he has had only a moderate impact on the team. I think it can be argued that Nelson has had as much or even more impact than Finley has had. As for their potential? Finley by a landslide, but we aren't rating potential, are we? If he doesn't have a good year in 2011 and leaves in the off season, he won't have "panned out" all that well for the Packers.

Maybe that's why so many disagree so strongly with me. I am looking at actual impact and others are looking more to the future. As I have said over and over, I would give that draft a "C" for now, but have acknowledged it could move much higher depending on where the future takes Finley and Nelson, and if they get something from the pick of Flynn.

I think a GM can have a great draft that just doesn't pan out due to injury.

That is fair then. I still think you have a harsh curve, but I understand it at least. I still say we got 4 NFL starters from this draft, even if only 2 of them are starting for us right now. 2 more could be starting elsewhere. I can buy not giving it an A due to finley not completing a season yet.

[Iron Mike]

Taco John's is closed? Is the Mad Hatter closed too?

Taco John's was sold to a local owner who kept the same recipes, but changed the name to Mexicanna Express. Then a few years ago, they built a new Taco John's where Petrie's Restaurant was.

There was a fire at the Mad Hatter, and they moved the store in between 5th and 6th Streets on Main Street.

http://www.directtoustore.com/madhatteur2

I guess you have to actually go to the store to buy a bong, though......

[Pugger]

Is the Taco Johns in Green Bay still there on the east side? When my hubby and I are in Green Bay for the summer we always make it a point to go there a few times.

[get louder at lambeau]

Taco John's was sold to a local owner who kept the same recipes, but changed the name to Mexicanna Express. Then a few years ago, they built a new Taco John's where Petrie's Restaurant was.

There was a fire at the Mad Hatter, and they moved the store in between 5th and 6th Streets on Main Street.

http://www.directtoustore.com/madhatteur2

I guess you have to actually go to the store to buy a bong, though......

Petrie's is Taco Johns now? Where am I supposed to get my clam chowder at? Bastards.

[Brandon494]

Anyway back on topic...

Here is the grade I would give each player based on their talent and the round they were drafted...

Jordy Nelson - B-
Brian Brohm - F
Pat Lee - D-
JerMichael Finley - A+
Jeremy Thompson - incomplete
Josh Sitton - A+
Breno Giacomini - D
Matt Flynn - A
Brett Swain - C-

Any GM would be lucky to have a draft like this every year IMO for those who think it was just an average draft.

[Patler]

Anyway back on topic...

Here is the grade I would give each player based on their talent and the round they were drafted...

Jordy Nelson - B-
Brian Brohm - F
Pat Lee - D-
JerMichael Finley - A+
Jeremy Thompson - incomplete
Josh Sitton - A+
Breno Giacomini - D
Matt Flynn - A
Brett Swain - C-

Any GM would be lucky to have a draft like this every year IMO for those who think it was just an average draft.

I think it was a good draft, but that to date the impact of it is not as good as its potential.

I would give Finley an "A" for potential, a "C" for actual contributions to date.
(I don't mess with "+" or "-", mostly because in my own mind I can't differentiate between "B-" and "C+", for example.
Thompson gets a "D", because he is done and he has to have a final grade.
Flynn gets a "B" from me. (I don't give a lot of "A's".
The rest would be the same letter value from me, based on actual impact to date.

I agree that any GM should be happy with that draft, because a GM is also looking to its potential. But in terms of its actual impact so far, it is not as good as it could be.

Again, I am grading the impact of the draft, not TT's performance.

[Deputy Nutz]

Jordy Nelson, TT traded back into the second round and with his first pick he selected Nelson. Through three season Nelson has averaged 33 catches for 422 yards, and 2 touchdowns. His biggest game to date was in the 2010 Super Bowl where he caught 9 passes for 140 yards and a touchdown. He has been a consistent 4th wide receiver for the Packers who value a rotation of their wide receivers so Nelson has had a limited chances to be the focus of qb Aaron Rodgers. Nelson is a deep ball threat and has the ability to run after the catch. Still he has not had a break out season to date and will still be no better than 3rd on the depth chart at the start of the 2011 season. Grade C+

Brian Brohm, Was considered one of the NFL ready QBs from this draft but as soon as camp started any notion of that was a huge misunderstanding. He demonstrated a lack of arm strength, problems with accuracy, and poor footwork. Made the Roster in 2008 but was cut in 2009 when 7th rounder Matt Flynn demonstrated a better understanding of the playbook, and skill on the field. Brohm signed on to the Practice Squad but was then signed by the Bills. Has yet to make a positive impact for the Bills. Grade F

Pat Lee, another second round pick that has shown a tremendous lack of production on the field due to injury. He was dubbed a raw talent in the 2008 draft but had the size and talent that TT looks for in his defensive backs. Like Nelson saved his biggest impact for the Super Bowl where he filled in for the injured Charles Woodson and had a solid game. Will be in a fight for a roster spot in 2011. Grade D

Jermicheal Finnely, 3rd round draft pick that has played close to the book that was written on him before the draft. A tremendous talent, most talent among Tight Ends in the 2008 draft but a complete lack of maturity. Had a break out season in 2009 but after the season it was reported that he missed or showed up late to several meetings and had upset the coaching staff. He also missed all but 4 games of the 2010 season and missed a handful of games in 2009 as well. Finely might be the top talent on the roster, but his lack of maturity might be the reason that TT has drafted Tight Ends in two of the last drafts. Grade B

[Tarlam!]

(I don't mess with "+" or "-", mostly because in my own mind I can't differentiate between "B-" and "C+", for example.


It's pretty liberal especially on school report cards. If the teacher likes the kid it's a B- if not, it's a C+. I liked my math teaher who scored points for the summary of work. It was fair and reflective of performance. And for this reason it should be abolished except A+ and F-.

I disagree with Swain being a C-. Firstly, the kid works damned hard and is always ready to step up. He's excellent on ST and a thankful #6 WR (counting Finley). If anything, he makes Jones superfluous IMO, because his drops are no where near as critical.

And there's no way Jordy gets less than a B from me. He's come up big time at times when the team has really needed it.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Nelson = B
Finley = B (with potential to turn into A)
Flynn = A (rare to get somebody like Flynn that late)
Sitton = A

There's only one WR (DeSean Jackson) taken in the first two rounds in 2008 that I think is clearly better than Nelson. The rest are Donnie Avery, Devin Thomas, James Hardy, Eddie Royal, Jerome Simpson, Malcolm Kelly, and Dexter Jackson.

TEs drafted before Finley were Dustin Keller, John Carlson, Fred Davis, Marcellus Bennett, Brad Cottam, and Craig Stephens. The TEs chosen after him were all non-descript. Give Carlson and Keller credit for staying healthy, but I wouldn't take either Finley going further (injury concerns or not). We all knew Finley would take awhile to max out. He was young when he came into the league. I was surprised he turned into a stud so soon. Injuries knock him down, but I fully expect to give this an A grade after this season.

Sitton is an elite OG and Flynn was a steal. Not much explanation needed for them.

[Brandon494]

Anyone who doesnt think drafting a talent like Finley in the 3rd round doesnt deserve an "A" seriously needs to get their head checked. You guys are acting like hes Justin Harrell or somebody. He got extremely unlucky last season getting injuried making a tackle, then got an infection and now all of sudden hes injury prone? Overreact much?

[ThunderDan]

Anyone who doesnt think drafting a talent like Finley in the 3rd round doesnt deserve an "A" seriously needs to get their head checked. You guys are acting like hes Justin Harrell or somebody. He got extremely unlucky last season getting injuried making a tackle, then got an infection and now all of sudden hes injury prone? Overreact much?

Donald Lee was just trying to get more playing time by fumbling the ball on that play!

[Tarlam!]

Harv, well made point on the D Jackson WRs.

Brondon, we are waiting to see if A) He's capable of a full season and B) If he's mature enough.

If that means we need medical attention so be it.

[Brandon494]

It's pretty liberal especially on school report cards. If the teacher likes the kid it's a B- if not, it's a C+. I liked my math teaher who scored points for the summary of work. It was fair and reflective of performance. And for this reason it should be abolished except A+ and F-.

I disagree with Swain being a C-. Firstly, the kid works damned hard and is always ready to step up. He's excellent on ST and a thankful #6 WR (counting Finley). If anything, he makes Jones superfluous IMO, because his drops are no where near as critical.

And there's no way Jordy gets less than a B from me. He's come up big time at times when the team has really needed it.

haha ok keep hyping up Swain, exactly what grade would you give him? Hes an below average player with no upside who goes hard on special teams because thats the only way he'll make the team. Also while Jordy did have 9 catches in the super bowl don't forget the drop balls he had as well. I'd give him A grade if he was a #1 reciever, a B if he was a #2 reciever but I went with B- since hes a #3 reciever with pontenial to be a #2 IMO.

[pbmax]

Not me. We just won the Super Bowl without Finley. We probably wouldn't have won the Super Bowl without Jordy. He had Finley-like numbers in the postseason this year-

Divisional @ATL 8 catches for 79 yards and a TD
Conference @CHI 4 catches for 67 yards
Super Bowl v. PIT 9 catches for 140 yards and a TD

I don't strictly agree with sharpe, but I think you have taken this comparison a bit too far. By this logic, Peprah is more valuable than Al Harris, Jarius Wynn over Mike Neal and Jarret Bush over Woodson. Each was productive while the nominal starter was unavailable but that's not the whole story.

I think Nelson's production means he is definitely better than the backup TEs and possible Jones, but it doesn't place him above Finley. With a bit more time, it might have told us he is more durable than Finley, making him the more valuable player. But its hard to fault a TE for being hurt on a tackle attempt after an O turnover.

[Brandon494]

But its hard to fault a TE for being hurt on a tackle attempt after an O turnover.

EXACTLY!

[Brandon494]

Jordy Nelson, TT traded back into the second round and with his first pick he selected Nelson. Through three season Nelson has averaged 33 catches for 422 yards, and 2 touchdowns. His biggest game to date was in the 2010 Super Bowl where he caught 9 passes for 140 yards and a touchdown. He has been a consistent 4th wide receiver for the Packers who value a rotation of their wide receivers so Nelson has had a limited chances to be the focus of qb Aaron Rodgers. Nelson is a deep ball threat and has the ability to run after the catch. Still he has not had a break out season to date and will still be no better than 3rd on the depth chart at the start of the 2011 season. Grade C+

Brian Brohm, Was considered one of the NFL ready QBs from this draft but as soon as camp started any notion of that was a huge misunderstanding. He demonstrated a lack of arm strength, problems with accuracy, and poor footwork. Made the Roster in 2008 but was cut in 2009 when 7th rounder Matt Flynn demonstrated a better understanding of the playbook, and skill on the field. Brohm signed on to the Practice Squad but was then signed by the Bills. Has yet to make a positive impact for the Bills. Grade F

Pat Lee, another second round pick that has shown a tremendous lack of production on the field due to injury. He was dubbed a raw talent in the 2008 draft but had the size and talent that TT looks for in his defensive backs. Like Nelson saved his biggest impact for the Super Bowl where he filled in for the injured Charles Woodson and had a solid game. Will be in a fight for a roster spot in 2011. Grade D

Jermicheal Finnely, 3rd round draft pick that has played close to the book that was written on him before the draft. A tremendous talent, most talent among Tight Ends in the 2008 draft but a complete lack of maturity. Had a break out season in 2009 but after the season it was reported that he missed or showed up late to several meetings and had upset the coaching staff. He also missed all but 4 games of the 2010 season and missed a handful of games in 2009 as well. Finely might be the top talent on the roster, but his lack of maturity might be the reason that TT has drafted Tight Ends in two of the last drafts. Grade B

Welcome back on the bandwagon

[swede]

Don't be pissing off Nutz, now....:)

he's like a recovering Packaholic who has come back to work as a bartender. There is precious little good football content and Nutz brings some good stuff when he is the mood to write.

[retailguy]

Welcome back on the bandwagon

Nutz has forgotten more about football than you'll ever know. At least he had the common sense to mostly shut up when he was unhappy.

[Brandon494]

Retail suck my fuckin dick and choke on a nut!

[retailguy]

Retail suck my fuckin dick and choke on a nut!

Truth hurts, my opinionated friend. ;)

[swede]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PS3WsZi0C48/TaNBcDxEIJI/AAAAAAAACIs/s19FVlz4aes/s320/john-mccain-snarling.jpg

Boys, I'm counting to three and so help me God if you two don't stop it I'm pulling this thread over and you both can walk to Uncle Ted's house.

[retailguy]

Boys, I'm counting to three and so help me God if you two don't stop it I'm pulling this thread over and you both can walk to Uncle Ted's house.

NO! Anything but that. I'll behave, the last time at Uncle Ted's, I found a whole book in his closet. It was very weird and I think he spends a lot of time there!.... ;)

[Patler]

Anyone who doesnt think drafting a talent like Finley in the 3rd round doesnt deserve an "A" seriously needs to get their head checked. You guys are acting like hes Justin Harrell or somebody. He got extremely unlucky last season getting injuried making a tackle, then got an infection and now all of sudden hes injury prone? Overreact much?

See, this is exactly how you and I differ in this thread.

I agree, the act of drafting Finley gets an "A" based on his potential. I give TT an "A".
But, in rating how it has "panned out", which is what the original question was, I don't see how it's an "A" for his actual performance. Just one season and a few games.

Good decision by TT that will hopefully pay greater rewards in the years to come.

[mraynrand]

See, this is exactly how you and I differ in this thread.

I agree, the act of drafting Finley gets an "A" based on his potential. I give TT an "A".
But, in rating how it has "panned out", which is what the original question was, I don't see how it's an "A" for his actual performance. Just one season and a few games.

Good decision by TT that will hopefully pay greater rewards in the years to come.


This is the whole issue - actual performance versus expectation/promise. Finley's had some amazing glimpses at the first, and a whole lot to look forward to - but there's no guarantee he'll produce over the long haul. That's why I like to wait 15-30 years before evaluating a draft.

[ThunderDan]

This is the whole issue - actual performance versus expectation/promise. Finley's had some amazing glimpses at the first, and a whole lot to look forward to - but there's no guarantee he'll produce over the long haul. That's why I like to wait 15-30 years before evaluating a draft.

I wouldn't wait that long most dogs are extremely lucky to see 12-15 years.

[Deputy Nutz]

Jordy Nelson, TT traded back into the second round and with his first pick he selected Nelson. Through three season Nelson has averaged 33 catches for 422 yards, and 2 touchdowns. His biggest game to date was in the 2010 Super Bowl where he caught 9 passes for 140 yards and a touchdown. He has been a consistent 4th wide receiver for the Packers who value a rotation of their wide receivers so Nelson has had a limited chances to be the focus of qb Aaron Rodgers. Nelson is a deep ball threat and has the ability to run after the catch. Still he has not had a break out season to date and will still be no better than 3rd on the depth chart at the start of the 2011 season. Grade C+

Brian Brohm, Was considered one of the NFL ready QBs from this draft but as soon as camp started any notion of that was a huge misunderstanding. He demonstrated a lack of arm strength, problems with accuracy, and poor footwork. Made the Roster in 2008 but was cut in 2009 when 7th rounder Matt Flynn demonstrated a better understanding of the playbook, and skill on the field. Brohm signed on to the Practice Squad but was then signed by the Bills. Has yet to make a positive impact for the Bills. Grade F

Pat Lee, another second round pick that has shown a tremendous lack of production on the field due to injury. He was dubbed a raw talent in the 2008 draft but had the size and talent that TT looks for in his defensive backs. Like Nelson saved his biggest impact for the Super Bowl where he filled in for the injured Charles Woodson and had a solid game. Will be in a fight for a roster spot in 2011. Grade D

Jermicheal Finnely, 3rd round draft pick that has played close to the book that was written on him before the draft. A tremendous talent, most talent among Tight Ends in the 2008 draft but a complete lack of maturity. Had a break out season in 2009 but after the season it was reported that he missed or showed up late to several meetings and had upset the coaching staff. He also missed all but 4 games of the 2010 season and missed a handful of games in 2009 as well. Finely might be the top talent on the roster, but his lack of maturity might be the reason that TT has drafted Tight Ends in two of the last drafts. Grade B

Jeremy Thompson, TT traded up to get him. He was set to play defensive end in a 4-3 defense. Did little in his first year with the Packers. Had a good off season and was switched to a 3-4 olb when the Packers brought in Dom Capers and was set to compete for a starting position in 2009. A severe neck injury in preseason cut not only his season short but his career. Nothinig he did Jumped off the monitor at me during his first season and unfortunately that is all the chance he got. Grade F

Josh Sitton, Bright spot of the draft. considered the best guard in the NFL by his peers. Snubbed in 2010 by pro bowl voters. Sitton is a mauler and at first look that would be all he appears to be, but then you watch him pass pro and his footwork is the best on the field next to Chad Clifton. Sitton is a reminder why GM's can wait later in the draft to hit on interior linemen. If the 2008 draft was redrafted Sitton would land in the first round. Grade A

Breno Giacomini, Just wasn't ready for the NFL. He was an oversized tight end that moved to tackle in college. Poor footwork and lack of technique kept him off the game day roster for most of the season. Had a chance in 2009 to start at right tackle but ended up 3rd on the depth chart and was cut in 2010. Giacomini is going to have to earn a roster spot with what ever team has his rights in 2011 but he has a long way to go before he could be intrusted a starting position in the NFL. Grade F,

Matt Flynn, smart gritty QB that could be a borderline starter in the NFL. Had on start in 2010 against the Patriots and had a solid game for a reserve QB. Considering he was a 7th round pick and he has been Aaron Rogers backup for the last two years and the one of the only 3 QBs to start for the Packers in the last 19 years. Flynn was a championship QB at LSU and his grit and determination got him drafted in the 7th round but his work ethic allowed him to become a highly sought after free agent in 2012. Grade A-

Brett Swain, Swain has done little to impress as a wide receiver, but he has demonstrated a knack for special teams. Special teams is the reason he has a roster spot, the Packers have cut more talented wide receivers to keep Swain on the team because of his ability as a gunner on punt coverage and kick coverage. Swain is going to have to prove something as a wide receiver in 2011 or he will be looking to land on another teams roster. considering he was seventh round pick and he has managed to stay on the active roster for three seasons is impressive career considering where he came from. Grade C


Here is the rest of it.

[Deputy Nutz]

Don't be pissing off Nutz, now....:)

he's like a recovering Packaholic who has come back to work as a bartender. There is precious little good football content and Nutz brings some good stuff when he is the mood to write.

Just not committed emotionally anymore.

[channtheman]

Just not committed emotionally anymore.

Which isn't necessarily a bad place to be. I hate when my whole week is ruined by a loss. On the flipside, you can't bring me down after a win.

[Tarlam!]

Just not committed emotionally anymore.

Another victim of Bert Farp.

[King Friday]

This draft is about a C for me. I like to assign values of 1-10 for each player and divide by 40, which is about what I think an average draft should produce IMO. I get the 40 by thinking that most teams get 8 picks on average who should produce roughly to this grading: 9-7-5-5-4-4-2-2-2

Rough draft grading guidelines - although one superstar pick could bump up a grade due to importance of those guys.
>52 = A draft
45-52 = B draft
36-44 = C draft
28-35 = D draft
<28 = F draft

Rough player grading guidelines:
10: Pro Bowl caliber starter
8-9: Very good starter
6-7: OK starter/talented reserve
4-5: Reserve who makes contributions
2-3: Roster filler who hasn't made an impact
1: Certain bust

Nelson: 7
The kid is a very solid #3 receiver who potentially might have a little more upside remaining. Will never be a star, but is reliable and his contribution in the Super Bowl run was undeniable.

Brohm: 1
The guy never seemed to have a clue. Probably will go down as one of Thompson's worst draft choices.

Lee: 2
If he was a 6th round pick, he'd be OK. As the 60th pick overall, he's virtually a bust.

Finley: 6
Tremendous talent, but needs to put up an 75+ catch season before you can seriously say he's arrived. Obviously his grade has potential to move higher, but this year is going to be a huge factor in determining that.

Thompson: 3
Not much to see here from an early 4th round pick.

Sitton: 10
A bona fide starter with serious Pro Bowl potential in the near future. Far and away the best pick of this draft.

Giacomini: 1
Another guy that never seemed to really establish himself at all, even though there was plenty of chance with the mediocre play from the OL prior to 2010.

Flynn: 5
Tough to grade a backup QB. He's shown a lot of promise, and with Rodgers as the franchise it would appear that Flynn's greatest contribution will be what kind of draft pick compensation he can bring in a trade.

Swain: 3
The guy actually stuck to the roster a lot longer than I thought he would. Probably could be 5th receiver on many NFL teams. Not bad for 7th round.

TOTAL = 38

I'd bump this up to a solid C based on Finley's POTENTIAL. If he becomes the superstar he thinks he is, then I'd bump the draft up to a solid B.

[swede]

GIGO

[Iron Mike]

Anyway back on topic...

Fuck that.


Petrie's is Taco Johns now? Where am I supposed to get my clam chowder at? Bastards.

Schreiner's, obviously.....

http://www.fdlchowder.com/

[Iron Mike]

Hey Iron Mike, how 'bout an Appleton Revisited Pub Crawl for Mother's Day??

I'm down with that.

http://germanrestaurantappleton.com/

http://www.mcguinnessirishpub.com/

http://www.109westcollege.com/

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3155/3025311388_87a9939c3c.jpg

[packerbacker1234]

The thing about grading drafts is the only fair way to grade them is to compare it to how all the other teams faired that year. On average, I think it's more likely teams have bad drafts then good ones - because everyone is drafting based on talent.

Every year you're going to draft guys that simply don't pan out, but you may find guys others didn't think would be that great and they turn out to be awesome - (IE, Sitton).

If I am giving a grade, and basing it on what others did, it would have to be a B. We got a sure fire stud out of this draft in Sitton for great value, a solid #3 WR, and a good potential stud TE who claims to be working on getting his head straight, but we'll see. We got great value 7th round pick in Flynn who is slowly proving to be possibly worth a shot in starting for some team - but he has high value for the packers after the NE game. Rodgers now has a history of concussions - so his next one will likely force rodgers to miss another game. That means the backup position is of great importance in GB.

Lee is still around and performed in the most important game of his life. Swain turned out to be a good value. 7th rounder with great special teams skill.

Of what we drafted, I count 3 guys who haven't made any impact. 3 out of 9. That's a pretty darn good draft overall.

[Brandon494]

This draft is about a C for me. I like to assign values of 1-10 for each player and divide by 40, which is about what I think an average draft should produce IMO. I get the 40 by thinking that most teams get 8 picks on average who should produce roughly to this grading: 9-7-5-5-4-4-2-2-2

Rough draft grading guidelines - although one superstar pick could bump up a grade due to importance of those guys.
>52 = A draft
45-52 = B draft
36-44 = C draft
28-35 = D draft
<28 = F draft

Rough player grading guidelines:
10: Pro Bowl caliber starter
8-9: Very good starter
6-7: OK starter/talented reserve
4-5: Reserve who makes contributions
2-3: Roster filler who hasn't made an impact
1: Certain bust

Nelson: 7
The kid is a very solid #3 receiver who potentially might have a little more upside remaining. Will never be a star, but is reliable and his contribution in the Super Bowl run was undeniable.

Brohm: 1
The guy never seemed to have a clue. Probably will go down as one of Thompson's worst draft choices.

Lee: 2
If he was a 6th round pick, he'd be OK. As the 60th pick overall, he's virtually a bust.

Finley: 6
Tremendous talent, but needs to put up an 75+ catch season before you can seriously say he's arrived. Obviously his grade has potential to move higher, but this year is going to be a huge factor in determining that.

Thompson: 3
Not much to see here from an early 4th round pick.

Sitton: 10
A bona fide starter with serious Pro Bowl potential in the near future. Far and away the best pick of this draft.

Giacomini: 1
Another guy that never seemed to really establish himself at all, even though there was plenty of chance with the mediocre play from the OL prior to 2010.

Flynn: 5
Tough to grade a backup QB. He's shown a lot of promise, and with Rodgers as the franchise it would appear that Flynn's greatest contribution will be what kind of draft pick compensation he can bring in a trade.

Swain: 3
The guy actually stuck to the roster a lot longer than I thought he would. Probably could be 5th receiver on many NFL teams. Not bad for 7th round.

TOTAL = 38

I'd bump this up to a solid C based on Finley's POTENTIAL. If he becomes the superstar he thinks he is, then I'd bump the draft up to a solid B.

Finley deserves more than a 6, how is he not a very good starter? It amazes me the lack of respect this guy's talent is getting on this board. Oh well I'll enjoy bumping this thread next season....thats if there is a next season :/

[Brandon494]

Jermicheal Finnely, 3rd round draft pick that has played close to the book that was written on him before the draft. A tremendous talent, most talent among Tight Ends in the 2008 draft but a complete lack of maturity. Had a break out season in 2009 but after the season it was reported that he missed or showed up late to several meetings and had upset the coaching staff. He also missed all but 4 games of the 2010 season and missed a handful of games in 2009 as well. Finely might be the top talent on the roster, but his lack of maturity might be the reason that TT has drafted Tight Ends in two of the last drafts. Grade B

DJ Williams and Ryan Taylor might have played TE in college but they are projected to play FB/H Back in our offense. Also Taylor is a former LB who only played one season at TE. They were drafted to replace Korey Hall and Quinn Johnson, not one of our top talented players.

[bobblehead]

Retail suck my fuckin dick and choke on a nut!

Brandon, I am being whimsical here, not confrontational, but I can't resist.

Is it so small that someone like RG (who is likely unskilled at deepthroating) could actually GET to a nut??

[Brandon494]

Whats the main goal in getting your dick sucked? To bust a "nut", not as in testicle.

[get louder at lambeau]

I don't strictly agree with sharpe, but I think you have taken this comparison a bit too far. By this logic, Peprah is more valuable than Al Harris, Jarius Wynn over Mike Neal and Jarret Bush over Woodson. Each was productive while the nominal starter was unavailable but that's not the whole story.

I think Nelson's production means he is definitely better than the backup TEs and possible Jones, but it doesn't place him above Finley. With a bit more time, it might have told us he is more durable than Finley, making him the more valuable player. But its hard to fault a TE for being hurt on a tackle attempt after an O turnover.

The question was never whether Finley or Jordy was more valuable. He said he'd take 5 games of Finley over 16 of Jordy. That's what I was disagreeing with.

And those playoff numbers by Jordy are HUGE. Let's not compare him to Peprah and Wynn. If Finley did what Jordy just did in the playoffs, everyone would be lining up to suck his dick and screaming for him to be re-signed to a megabucks deal.

Only 4 wide receivers in NFL history have caught more balls in a Super Bowl than Jordy just did in SB XLV. No Packer has ever had more catches in a postseason game than Jordy just did in the Super Bowl. Only 3 Packers have ever had more receiving yards in any postseason game than Jordy just had in the Super Bowl.

Nelson's performance set new Packer Super Bowl records for both catches and receiving yards, yet doesn't get much mention for doing it, for some strange reason.

For comparison purposes-

Jordy Nelson in Super Bowl XLV-
9 catches, 140 yards, and a TD.

Finley's best NFL game ever vs. AZ in the playoffs after the 2009 season-
6 catches 159 yards, 0 TDs

Max McGee's legendary hungover performance in Super Bowl I-
7 catches, 138 yards, 2 TDs

Antonio Freeman in SB XXXI (best receiving performance in SB XXI)-
3 catches, 105 yards, 1 TD

[Brandon494]

Jordy did have a huge postseason and ARod had trust in him to continue to throw him the ball even with the drops which showed a lot.

[mraynrand]

Finley deserves more than a 6, how is he not a very good starter? It amazes me the lack of respect this guy's talent is getting on this board. Oh well I'll enjoy bumping this thread next season....thats if there is a next season :/

You're still stuck in the wrong aspect of the argument. There are two parallel points being made on this thread. You are getting upset with people for evaluating Finley's total contribution as though they are disparaging his talent, potential and past achievements. Sky's the limit for Finley. I said before the season and during the season that he was one of the few game changers on the team. he still is. If he stays healthy and in a good system, Finley could end up a top 2-3 TEs of all time. But you can't get around the fact that they won it all without him. Other guys stepped up, most notably Rodgers, who had one of the greatest post-seasons from a QB that you'll ever see. Keep that offense intact and look out.

[Brandon494]

Just because they won the SB without him doesn't mean he still isn't a top 5 talent at TE. We already know we have a top 3 QB along with a top 10 reiever. No offense to Grant but if Starks or Green break out to be top 10 talent it's a fucking wrap.

[pbmax]

The question was never whether Finley or Jordy was more valuable. He said he'd take 5 games of Finley over 16 of Jordy. That's what I was disagreeing with.

Yes, I understand. But in making your argument, you claim the Packers couldn't have won the SB without Nelson and did win without Finley. And my point is that this argument doesn't shed much light on either player's value to the team. Nelson contributed mightily as the 4th WR. Finley, had he been available rather than Nelson, would have been the 1st or 2nd target.

Nelson did come through at a crucial time, but not in such a way that Finley (or even Jones) couldn't surpass if they were the fourth most feared option on the Packer offense.

There is a point, however, where the point Patler, Rand, yourself and others have been making will dominate. Sometime soon Finley has to stay on the field.

[Bretsky]

If Finley stays on the field IMO he is undoubtedly one of the top 5 TE's in football
Immense talent and very hard to replace that talent. Not one TE in college had that talent IMO.

Jordy Nelson is a fine player; IMO he's starter quality right now. But you can replace a #2 WR.

[mraynrand]

Just because they won the SB without him doesn't mean he still isn't a top 5 talent at TE.


You're exactly right. He could be the best TE in the history of the world. He could be the best at catching any object that mankind has even known. Hde could be a genius beyond Einstein or even Steven Hawking. He may have excrement that tastes like blueberry waffles. Still, the Packers won the Superbowl without him. He's expendable.

[pbmax]

You're exactly right. He could be the best TE in the history of the world. He could be the best at catching any object that mankind has even known. Hde could be a genius beyond Einstein or even Steven Hawking. He may have excrement that tastes like blueberry waffles. Still, the Packers won the Superbowl without him. He's expendable.

I know what you are getting at, but expendable is not the right description. He isn't a necessity if the team has four high functioning WRs and the Number 2 defense in the league. But since injury, age or luck can make those an impossibility at any moment, he is not expendable. You keep a talent like him until its patently clear he will never get back on the field.

The Packer offense underperformed in 2010 compared to 2009 and while late leads and better defense explain some of it, there were plenty of examples of uninspired performance and output. The Packers aren't good enough to make him expendable yet.

[get louder at lambeau]

Finley, had he been available rather than Nelson, would have been the 1st or 2nd target.

Nelson did come through at a crucial time, but not in such a way that Finley (or even Jones) couldn't surpass if they were the fourth most feared option on the Packer offense.

There are good and bad things to what number receiver you are in the pecking order. For whatever lack of respect you get from the defense due to being lower on the totem pole, you will also get less looks from the quarterback. Part of Finley's success is due to mismatches, often being covered by LBs who often can't cover for shit, so that kinda balances out the part where Jordy is taking advantage of nickel and dime corners.

The only thing we can measure anywhere near objectively is actual production. Nelson's 3 game postseason numbers are comparable to, or better than, any three game stretch Finley has ever had, and Nelson did it when it mattered most- the playoffs and the Super Bowl. It's just plain weird how little attention Nelson is getting from fans after that run. I'd be pretty surprised if he isn't our #2 next year, at least production-wise, if not in title.

[Pugger]

There are good and bad things to what number receiver you are in the pecking order. For whatever lack of respect you get from the defense due to being lower on the totem pole, you will also get less looks from the quarterback. Part of Finley's success is due to mismatches, often being covered by LBs who often can't cover for shit, so that kinda balances out the part where Jordy is taking advantage of nickel and dime corners.

The only thing we can measure anywhere near objectively is actual production. Nelson's 3 game postseason numbers are comparable to, or better than, any three game stretch Finley has ever had, and Nelson did it when it mattered most- the playoffs and the Super Bowl. It's just plain weird how little attention Nelson is getting from fans after that run. I'd be pretty surprised if he isn't our #2 next year, at least production-wise, if not in title.

He might not be getting the love because of the drops in the SB. But even with those he did have a great game that day!

[get louder at lambeau]

For comparison purposes-

Jordy Nelson in Super Bowl XLV-
9 catches, 140 yards, and a TD.

Finley's best NFL game ever vs. AZ in the playoffs after the 2009 season-
6 catches 159 yards, 0 TDs

Max McGee's legendary hungover performance in Super Bowl I-
7 catches, 138 yards, 2 TDs

Antonio Freeman in SB XXXI (best receiving performance in SB XXI)-
3 catches, 105 yards, 1 TD

Just thought of another good comparison-

Terrell Owens coming back super-humanly fast from surgery to play in Super Bowl XXIX-
9 catches, 122 yards, 0 TDs

[pbmax]

... you will also get less looks from the quarterback.

... Part of Finley's success is due to mismatches, often being covered by LBs who often can't cover for shit

... The only thing we can measure anywhere near objectively is actual production. Nelson's 3 game postseason numbers are comparable to, or better than, any three game stretch Finley has ever had, and Nelson did it when it mattered most- the playoffs and the Super Bowl.

... It's just plain weird how little attention Nelson is getting from fans after that run. I'd be pretty surprised if he isn't our #2 next year, at least production-wise, if not in title.

Unless of course you are in the Packer's offense which loves to feed the ball to the mismatch, even if the mismatch is the 3rd of 4th receiver or the 2nd TE.

Your second statement makes no sense. I don't care if Finley creates mismatches or coats his jersey with hallucinogens (in his case, he is being covered by the best coverage option teams have at LB and S, plus the occasional CB). He gets the job done as the primary target. Indeed, in two of his best games, he seemed like the only reliable target.

And while production does generate numbers you can study objectively, the numbers still do not tell you all you need to know. Or with his 3 game stretch, Nelson would be a shoe in for All Pro status with Timmy Smith, Scott Mitchell, Ickey Woods and Cledtius Hunt.

Nelson has done OK for the 3rd or 4th receiver and had a great post-season. But he has yet to prove he can be a consistent #2 receiver. Finley can be a #1 TE. If he can stay healthy.

[King Friday]

Finley deserves more than a 6, how is he not a very good starter? It amazes me the lack of respect this guy's talent is getting on this board. Oh well I'll enjoy bumping this thread next season....thats if there is a next season :/

It isn't about talent. I clearly stated that he is a "tremendous talent". What part of that comment do you not understand?

The grades are about what the players have actually DONE ON THE FIELD to this point. Finley has not accomplished that much. It's not really his fault, but injuries still keep you off the field and the importance of a guy who is regularly available is key.

If the guy can stay healthy and post a 75+ catch season, then he's suddenly up to a grade of 8-9. However, I can't give that to him simply because of talent...production is all that matters in the NFL. To this point, Nelson has been more productive than Finley and was a key factor in the team's drive to a Super Bowl title.

Bottom line, to this point, REGARDLESS OF TALENT, Nelson has provided more impact on the field in his career for the Packers than Finley has. That is indisputable and that is what I'm grading on.

[King Friday]

Nelson did come through at a crucial time, but not in such a way that Finley (or even Jones) couldn't surpass if they were the fourth most feared option on the Packer offense.

Sorry Max, but I have to disagree on Jones. The guy DID have chances this year to be an impact player in the playoffs, but dropped those chances when they hit him right between the numbers. Combine that with his fumble against the Bears earlier in the year and I just can't give Jones the benefit of the doubt anymore. He just doesn't have any kind of consistency to his game whatsoever. Jones was on the field in the playoffs virtually as much as Jordy from what I saw, especially in the SB after Driver went down. Even so, Jordy had twice the catches that Jones did in the postseason.

[pbmax]

Sorry Max, but I have to disagree on Jones. The guy DID have chances this year to be an impact player in the playoffs, but dropped those chances when they hit him right between the numbers. Combine that with his fumble against the Bears earlier in the year and I just can't give Jones the benefit of the doubt anymore. He just doesn't have any kind of consistency to his game whatsoever. Jones was on the field in the playoffs virtually as much as Jordy from what I saw, especially in the SB after Driver went down. Even so, Jordy had twice the catches that Jones did in the postseason.

Jones has his warts, certainly. But Nelson has disappeared for very long stretches and (until this playoff run) was a notch below in production. Nelson also had a bad case of drops this year like Jones (in fact, I think he had more this year). I love that Nelson delivered, but its going to take more than a 3 game stretch to change my opinion on the relative abilities of the position.

[Fritz]

What I don't understand is how people can glom onto Jones's drops and ignore the big catches he made, yet gloss over Nelson's drops in the SB while championing the big catches he made.

How many did Nelson drop? Three? And one, I recall, looked like it could've gone for a TD - just like the Jones drop we all refer to.

[get louder at lambeau]

Jones has his warts, certainly. But Nelson has disappeared for very long stretches and (until this playoff run) was a notch below in production. Nelson also had a bad case of drops this year like Jones (in fact, I think he had more this year). I love that Nelson delivered, but its going to take more than a 3 game stretch to change my opinion on the relative abilities of the position.

When did Nelson disappear? His stats show multiple catches in 13 of 16 games, and are comparable to Driver and Jones in catches and yards per game. And then he blew up in the playoffs.

In my opinion, we have four starting caliber WRs. After the playoffs, and with Driver's age and Jones' contract, Jordy should be the true #2 next year. I think he just earned a shot at starting opposite Jennings with that Super Bowl performance. He has the most upside, IMO, since he's the youngest and seems to just be hitting his stride. I think he just needs more opportunity as a WR, and to be removed from kickoffs to concentrate on his receiving.

As far as drops, do people really expect that someone targeted about 11 times in a game will catch every one of them? Catching 9 of them is good enough for top 10 all time in a Super Bowl, but you expect even more? As far as Jones, I'm not one of those who was criticizing him for his drops, either. He makes plays. Wes Welker dropped 13 passes this year. Drops happen. I'd like to see a few less from all our guys, but they will never catch them all.

[mraynrand]

not to mention that Jennings had a drop/int in Detroit that very well may have gone for a TD and arguably led to that loss. Receivers drop passes, some more noticeably and frequently than others, but what determines the popular perception is the circumstances of the drop combined with the entire body of work for that particular receiver.

[mraynrand]

I know what you are getting at, but expendable is not the right description.....

yeah, too much breathless hyperbole on my part. Plus the Superbowl victory is beside the point of the thread anyway. I am due my own admonishment. Love Finley's talent; hope to see him on the field for the Packers for many years to come.

[Tarlam!]

Jordy is a great Packer and a legitimate starter on 32 teams. I'm damned certain 16 teams at least would give TT a 2nd and 3rd for him.

[Brandon494]

You can go by stats all you want but every ball thrown to Nelson was right on his hands, even the drops. Just because was matched up against their 3rd and 4th CB all game and Rodgers took advantage of it doesn't mean he should be starting over Driver next season. Now if he comes to camp improved from last year and is the better player then by all means he should start but I'm not sold on him yet. Just like Jones Nelson had his stare of drops and fumbles last season. Finley on the other hand if the balls even touches the tip of his finger he's making the catch and that's why I think Rodgers tried to force it to him early in the season because the guys is our #1 target when he's on the field.

[Brandon494]

Jordy is a great Packer and a legitimate starter on 32 teams. I'm damned certain 16 teams at least would give TT a 2nd and 3rd for him.

I'm damned certain your wrong on that one buddy, might want to take those homer glasses off.

[Tarlam!]

IThanks for your feedback.I stand by my opinion, as I'm sure you stand by yours.

[Brandon494]

Go ahead and name the teams

[get louder at lambeau]

You can go by stats all you want but every ball thrown to Nelson was right on his hands, even the drops. Just because was matched up against their 3rd and 4th CB all game and Rodgers took advantage of it doesn't mean he should be starting over Driver next season. Now if he comes to camp improved from last year and is the better player then by all means he should start but I'm not sold on him yet. Just like Jones Nelson had his stare of drops and fumbles last season. Finley on the other hand if the balls even touches the tip of his finger he's making the catch and that's why I think Rodgers tried to force it to him early in the season because the guys is our #1 target when he's on the field.

Driver had the most drops of anyone last year, Brandon, so if that's your criteria for who should start, it shouldn't be Driver. As receivers, Driver and Jordy both had 1 fumble too, so that doesn't decide anything. Jones had 3 fumbles. Jordy's fumble as a WR was when he got tackled from 3 sides while fighting for a first down and someone put a helmet on the ball. His other two were on kick returns. As I said before, he shouldn't be returning kicks anymore. That's Randall Cobb's job now.

As far as passes being right on Jordy's hands, our QB is Aaron Rodgers- ALL of our wide receivers have the benefit of a great QB who puts it right on their hands, not just Jordy. And they ALL dropped passes that hit them in the hands this year, even Jennings. All passes recorded as drops hit the receiver in the hands.

Driver dropped 7, Jones 6, and then there's Jordy and Jennings. The only place I know to find stats on drops only shows the guys who had the most in the NFC, including Driver tied for 7th and Jones tied for 14th. It doesn't show how many Jordy or Jennings had, because they didn't drop enough balls to make the list- http://hosted.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?range=NFC&type=Receiving&rank=232&year=

[King Friday]

What I don't understand is how people can glom onto Jones's drops and ignore the big catches he made, yet gloss over Nelson's drops in the SB while championing the big catches he made.

As for Jones, he dropped the ball at such crucial times in the postseason when the Packers had a chance to blow open games and deliver a punishing blow to the opponent, and the passes hit him right in the numbers in stride every time. Then you see him made a ridiculously hard catch and you wonder why the hell he can't catch one almost dropped into his lap.

However, the biggest reason for the viewpoint you question is that Jordy turned around after his drops and MADE a huge catch that made up for it almost every time. The fact that Rodgers did not lose faith in Jordy and often went right back to him tells me something...and that is probably true of many other Packer fans. As someone else mentioned ALL receivers drop passes, and the ability to get past the drop and turn around the next play and make something happen is very important for a receiver. To some extent, that is what I see missing in Jones. I'm not sure he gets over a bad drop quickly...he sort of disappears for awhile.

While I'm on the pro-Jordy bandwagon, I suppose, let me be clear that I'm not a believer that he's a starter on any NFL team. He could be on some teams, but there are a good number of #2 WRs that are better than Jordy to this point. I'll be interested to see how the successful postseason run impacts Nelson's confidence and production going forward.

[King Friday]

Driver dropped 7, Jones 6, and then there's Jordy and Jennings. The only place I know to find stats on drops only shows the guys who had the most in the NFC, including Driver tied for 7th and Jones tied for 14th. It doesn't show how many Jordy or Jennings had, because they didn't drop enough balls to make the list- http://hosted.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?range=NFC&type=Receiving&rank=232&year=

Yeah, Driver dropped a ton last year...have to give him a pass due to his reliable history and the nagging injuries he had most of the year, but it certainly wasn't a great year for Donald. Hope it isn't a sign of the end closing in just yet.

Jordy was the 2nd most reliable receiver (not best, mind you) on the team last year IMO. I think that is why Rodgers had the confidence to go back to him repeatedly in the postseason, even after a few drops.

[mraynrand]

It's going to be impossible to resolve whether Nelson or Jones are starting caliber until they get an opportunity to start. The Packer offense is built to create mismatches and so requires very good 3 and 4 receivers. Other teams just cannot cover them, if Rodgers has a reasonable amount of time in the pocket, so that has been their fate, to play in position so as to expose those mismatches and compliment a very good receiver in Jennings and attempt to supplant a rock-solid - up till this season - Driver.

We'll have to wait and see what Nelson and Jones look like as starters. I suspect we'll see in a hurry once this season starts because most likely Jordy will be starting for GB over Driver and Jones will be starting for someone else. It will be interesting to revisit the issue after they get a few games under their belts. I'm betting Nelson will have a significant advantage over Jones, because I suspect Jones will get snapped up by a not-so-good offensive squad and have to learn a new scheme...

[bobblehead]

What I don't understand is how people can glom onto Jones's drops and ignore the big catches he made, yet gloss over Nelson's drops in the SB while championing the big catches he made.

How many did Nelson drop? Three? And one, I recall, looked like it could've gone for a TD - just like the Jones drop we all refer to.

That was a point I was trying to make earlier this season when everyone was down on JJ. He made HUGE plays all year long. He made boneheaded plays, yes.....because he was in position to make huge plays. Jordy dropped just as many, but until the superbowl didn't make the game changers JJ did. I am with PB, Jones is the superior talent based on everything I have seen....preconceived notions aside.

[get louder at lambeau]

Your second statement makes no sense. I don't care if Finley creates mismatches or coats his jersey with hallucinogens (in his case, he is being covered by the best coverage option teams have at LB and S, plus the occasional CB). He gets the job done as the primary target. Indeed, in two of his best games, he seemed like the only reliable target.

How does it not make sense? You downplayed Nelson's production for being covered by the nickel or dime corner with this quote-
Nelson did come through at a crucial time, but not in such a way that Finley (or even Jones) couldn't surpass if they were the fourth most feared option on the Packer offense.

The only advantage to being "the fourth most feared option" is who they cover you with- nickel and dime corners. A large part of what makes Finley so productive is how he is often covered by inside linebackers who cover even worse than the guys covering Jordy. You give Finley credit for creating mismatches and downplay Jordy's production, despite the fact that the reason he got so many balls was that he was a mismatch vs. the guy across from him, just like Finley.

You call it being "the primary target" when Finley lines up against guys who can't cover him and catches lots of balls, and being "the fourth most feared option" when Nelson does the same. Nelson WAS Rodgers' primary target in the Super Bowl, due to the mismatch a fast 6'3" receiver provided going against a 5'10' nickel corner. Finley does the same thing as a 6'5" receiver going against slow LBs. Either way, it's a mismatch that our offense is built to take advantage of. Calling Finley the "primary target" makes it sound like he's being covered by the other team's best cover guy, which is almost never the case in reality. That guy is usually on Jennings.

[Brandon494]

Haha try nice but they double Finley most if the time, they have never doubled Jordy.

[swede]

Haha try nice but they double Finley most if the time...

Why would they double Finley? I've been reading on Packerrats Rate the Draft 2008 that he's all hat and no cattle.

[get louder at lambeau]

Haha try nice but they double Finley most if the time, they have never doubled Jordy.

OK, let me make something clear to you, since you don't seem to understand this- I never said Jordy is better than or equal to Finley. I don't believe that to be true. I believe Finley is a more talented player than Jordy. I just think fans tend to overvalue Finley and undervalue Jordy.

Now, please re-read that first statement.

OK, hopefully that sunk in, because any time I try to say that one player is undervalued by fans compared to a star who can do no wrong in fans' eyes, like Bush to Woodson for example, people seem to get confused and think I was arguing that the undervalued player is equal to or better than the star. Or that I hate the star player. Not the case. Just trying to evaluate them equally, and not allow the fan part of my brain to be blinded by hero-worship for the star, like fans usually do.

Here is a highlight video of Finley this last season. Looks like lots of linebackers covering him to me, just like I said. Guys wearing numbers like 55 and even 90 on him. Then the safety playing deep usually comes up to clean up after Finley scorches the LB-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzirey06vOU

Now here's one of Jordy this last season. If what Finley was getting in those highlights counts as double coverage to you, Nelson got the same exact treatment at the :35 mark and 2:30 mark-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGI2hPWyDe8

[mraynrand]

Haha try nice but they double Finley most if the time, they have never doubled Jordy.

This is just ignorant. Finley gets a LB/safety coverage and Nelson gets a Corner/safety coverage all the time in certain standard coverage schemes.

Does Finley get special treatment versus Nelson? Of course he does - He's arguably one of the top few TEs in the league and is a game changer. Nelson is the 3rd/4th receiver on one team. If you're going to make stupid arguments to say that Finley is better than Nelson in terms of raw talent relative to their positions, you're wasting your time and our time. I don't think anyone here will argue with you. If both are healthy, I'd take Finley of course.

That being said, they have different impacts though, based on where they are on the field and who they are matched up against. Nelson is valuable because no one can defense a very good WR who is the 3/4 WR. Finley is valuable because he is a game changer who forces other teams to alter their defensive scheme to cover him.

[sharpe1027]

This is just ignorant. Finley gets a LB/safety coverage and Nelson gets a Corner/safety coverage all the time in certain standard coverage schemes.

Does Finley get special treatment versus Nelson? Of course he does - He's arguably one of the top few TEs in the league and is a game changer. Nelson is the 3rd/4th receiver on one team. If you're going to make stupid arguments to say that Finley is better than Nelson in terms of raw talent relative to their positions, you're wasting your time and our time. I don't think anyone here will argue with you. If both are healthy, I'd take Finley of course.

That being said, they have different impacts though, based on where they are on the field and who they are matched up against. Nelson is valuable because no one can defense a very good WR who is the 3/4 WR. Finley is valuable because he is a game changer who forces other teams to alter their defensive scheme to cover him.

Referring back to the point of the thread. Which would you rate higher
1) a guy that is able to force mismatches as the #1 player at his position or
2) a guy that forces mismatches only if you have two guys better than him at the same position?

[mraynrand]

Referring back to the point of the thread. Which would you rate higher
1) a guy that is able to force mismatches as the #1 player at his position or
2) a guy that forces mismatches only if you have two guys better than him at the same position?

Is this the point of the thread? Which would you rather have: $100 or $10? Discuss. Better yet, which would you rather have: $100 in a bond that matures in a year or $10 in your hand right now. Please, don't discuss.

[sharpe1027]

Is this the point of the thread? Which would you rather have: $100 or $10? Discuss. Better yet, which would you rather have: $100 in a bond that matures in a year or $10 in your hand right now. Please, don't discuss.

The point of the thread is to grade the 2008 draft. A commonly accepted way to grade a group of items (drafts and individual pics therein) is to to determine a relative position for the items so that they can be evaluated/graded. Thus, one way to grade the draft is to rate each player relative to each other. This tangent started with an argument that Finley should not be considered highly rated, so much so that his relative position was below Nelson.

My statement seems absurd because it was meant too seem that way.

[Patler]

After 3 years, which tight end has panned out better?

Tight end "A" with 82 receptions, 1051 yards and 7 TDs; or
Tight end "B" with 124 receptions, 1127 yards and 17 TDs.

[mraynrand]

After 3 years, which tight end has panned out better?

Tight end "A" with 82 receptions, 1051 yards and 7 TDs; or
Tight end "B" with 124 receptions, 1127 yards and 17 TDs.


That A bond must be for 5 years

[Bretsky]

After 3 years, which tight end has panned out better?

Tight end "A" with 82 receptions, 1051 yards and 7 TDs; or
Tight end "B" with 124 receptions, 1127 yards and 17 TDs.


HOW OLD ARE THEY BOTH ?
ARE THEY IN SIMIALAR POWERED OFFENSES IN TERMS OF TOTAL PASSING YARDS PER YEAR ?
HOW MANY GAMES HAVE EACH PLAYED ?

Tight end B is most likely a possession TE; crappy Yards per catch at leas than 10yds. He probably gets plenty of opportunities so gut would tell me he's a stronger part of the offense than B .

Tight end A probably stretches the field far better than Tight end A. I think there is great value on TE's like Gates who can stretch the field because that created opportunities for the other WR's and makes them better. For GB my initial bias is Tight end A

[Brandon494]

Bottom line I know Finley has missed time and has yet to play a full season BUT his injury to me seemed more of being unlucky rather then being injury prone. I just feel like some think hes the next Robert Ferguson or something. He got injuired making a tackle, we dont have #4 at QB anymore so hopefully he wont be doing much more of that. You also have to factor in that he left school two years early. If he stays in school he'd be a sure fire 1st round draft pick, possibly even top 15. To me if you draft a sophmore in the 3rd round who would be a top 15 pick a year or two later then that has to be graded an A. Now I understand he hasnt put up the monster numbers yet BUT I still think the pontenial this guy has at the age of 24 highly out weighs his lack of production so far in his yonng career.

[get louder at lambeau]

I agree with all of that, Brandon. The only thing that should be noted is that Finley didn't just have one injury. He had a knee injury in 2009 to his other knee.

[sharpe1027]

After 3 years, which tight end has panned out better?

Tight end "A" with 82 receptions, 1051 yards and 7 TDs; or
Tight end "B" with 124 receptions, 1127 yards and 17 TDs.

Are they both playing in the same offense for those three years? What are the per/game numbers and the opposing competition during those games? Does one of the TEs block measurably better? Did one of the TEs play significantly more early in those three years and the other play significantly more later? Was one of the TEs stuck behind a very good TE and the other thrown in due to lack of competition and/or injury?

[Brandon494]

What he missed 3 games with a knee bruise?

[get louder at lambeau]

Referring back to the point of the thread. Which would you rate higher
1) a guy that is able to force mismatches as the #1 player at his position or
2) a guy that forces mismatches only if you have two guys better than him at the same position?

How are you so sure Jordy needs to be the #3 or lower to create a mismatch? He lit it up like few others have in college as the focal point of his offense, with 122 catches for 1606 yards and 11 TDs in 12 games. That's an average of 10 catches for 134 yards and a TD. He's a 6'3" 217 lb. receiver who has some moves, 4.5 speed and good hands. I think he'll do just fine as a starter.

[Patler]

After 3 years, which tight end has panned out better?

Tight end "A" with 82 receptions, 1051 yards and 7 TDs; or
Tight end "B" with 124 receptions, 1127 yards and 17 TDs.


HOW OLD ARE THEY BOTH ?
ARE THEY IN SIMIALAR POWERED OFFENSES IN TERMS OF TOTAL PASSING YARDS PER YEAR ?
HOW MANY GAMES HAVE EACH PLAYED ?

Tight end B is most likely a possession TE; crappy Yards per catch at leas than 10yds. He probably gets plenty of opportunities so gut would tell me he's a stronger part of the offense than B .

Tight end A probably stretches the field far better than Tight end A. I think there is great value on TE's like Gates who can stretch the field because that created opportunities for the other WR's and makes them better. For GB my initial bias is Tight end A


I wasn't really expecting an answer to my question, I just posed the comparison to point out the risk in overblowing what Finley has accomplished so far and jumping to conclusions about what he will be.

Tight end "A" is Finley.
Tight end "B" is the first three years of Bubba Franks' career.

No question Finley has far,far more potential as a receiver; but for what ever reasons, Finley hasn't been able to distinguish himself other than as potential. I know all the reasons, excuses, whatever. We don't need to rehash them. But, I certainly can't give Finley an "A" for actual contributions yet, not until he starts stringing together seasons of actual performances.

[Brandon494]

Can't really use college stats to prove what he can do as a starter in the pros. The guy did have 9 catches SB which shows he does have talent but the drops also showed he's not ready to be a starting WR yet.

[get louder at lambeau]

Can't really use college stats to prove what he can do as a starter in the pros. The guy did have 9 catches SB which shows he does have talent but the drops also showed he's not ready to be a starting WR yet.

Again you ignore the fact that the guy starting in front of him had more drops than Jordy did last year and similar total production.

Driver in 2011 including postseason-
65 catches, 734 yards, 4 TDs

Nelson in 2011 including postseason-
66 catches, 868 yards, 4 TDs

[sharpe1027]

How are you so sure Jordy needs to be the #3 or lower to create a mismatch? He lit it up like few others have in college as the focal point of his offense, with 122 catches for 1606 yards and 11 TDs in 12 games. That's an average of 10 catches for 134 yards and a TD. He's a 6'3" 217 lb. receiver who has some moves, 4.5 speed and good hands. I think he'll do just fine as a starter.

I am not sure, and I don't disagree with you that he might be fine as a starter, but the argument is that you can't judge Finely based upon potential, only on what he actually did. Same goes for Nelson.

[get louder at lambeau]

I am not sure, and I don't disagree with you that he might be fine as a starter, but the argument is that you can't judge Finely based upon potential, only on what he actually did. Same goes for Nelson.

Yeah, I guess that makes sense.

[get louder at lambeau]

What he missed 3 games with a knee bruise?

Yeah. More like 4 games really, since he was injured on the first passing play of the first possession against Cleveland, then missed the next three games after that. He was on crutches with a reported knee sprain. That was his left knee.

Then of course he missed 16 games this year with what was reported as a sprained right knee, later diagnosed as a torn lateral meniscus. And then he had a staph infection in that knee and a second surgery. Two years, two missed time knee injuries resulting in missing over 50% of the games played during that time.

We all hope his luck changes.

[mraynrand]

How are you so sure Jordy needs to be the #3 or lower to create a mismatch? He lit it up like few others have in college as the focal point of his offense, with 122 catches for 1606 yards and 11 TDs in 12 games. That's an average of 10 catches for 134 yards and a TD. He's a 6'3" 217 lb. receiver who has some moves, 4.5 speed and good hands. I think he'll do just fine as a starter.


I think we'll find out pretty quick this upcoming season how Jordy does as a starter.

[King Friday]

Not sure which is worse...thinking Finley has meager talent or thinking Nelson is a fraud.

I know both are flawed.

[Bretsky]

Again you ignore the fact that the guy starting in front of him had more drops than Jordy did last year and similar total production.

Driver in 2011 including postseason-
65 catches, 734 yards, 4 TDs

Nelson in 2011 including postseason-
66 catches, 868 yards, 4 TDs


How many games did Driver miss due to injury ?
Driver was hobbling around a few games before they shelved him

How many games did Nelson miss due to injury ?

I'm not arguing Jordy can't be a #2; I think he can..........but I'm not sure how valid similar production is when considering all of Driver's injuries

[Deputy Nutz]

Bottom line I know Finley has missed time and has yet to play a full season BUT his injury to me seemed more of being unlucky rather then being injury prone. I just feel like some think hes the next Robert Ferguson or something. He got injuired making a tackle, we dont have #4 at QB anymore so hopefully he wont be doing much more of that. You also have to factor in that he left school two years early. If he stays in school he'd be a sure fire 1st round draft pick, possibly even top 15. To me if you draft a sophmore in the 3rd round who would be a top 15 pick a year or two later then that has to be graded an A. Now I understand he hasnt put up the monster numbers yet BUT I still think the pontenial this guy has at the age of 24 highly out weighs his lack of production so far in his yonng career.

I understand your input about the talent of Finley. It was well noted during the 2008 draft that Finley was a very talented young man but was an immature football player both on and off the field which the Green Bay Packers have had issues with Finley. His rookie year was a complete wash where he upset his starting QB with quotes to the media about Rodgers' screw up with the placement of a pass. Finely missed several meeting or showed up late to several meeting in his second year and had a shitty off season where he was running around with Vince Young of all people.

Finley has yet to put together a full season of football for the Packers. Another reason why Finley only gets a "b" in my opinion is that he is a below average blocker. Sure he is a dynamic pass catcher, but playing tight end comes with two roles receiving and blocking.

Finley reminds me of a young Keith Jackson a great receiving tight end but blocks like shit and has no passion for it.

[Brandon494]

When you have pass catching skills like Finley in our offense not being a great blocker is a very small flaw.

[get louder at lambeau]

How many games did Driver miss due to injury ?
Driver was hobbling around a few games before they shelved him

How many games did Nelson miss due to injury ?

I'm not arguing Jordy can't be a #2; I think he can..........but I'm not sure how valid similar production is when considering all of Driver's injuries

Driver missed 3 games. He probably still played more snaps than Jordy did just because Driver was the #2 WR, so it probably starts to balance out a little.

[retailguy]

When you have pass catching skills like Finley in our offense not being a great blocker is a very small flaw.

How big of a "flaw" does it have to be to not give him an "A" grade? How many games can he miss before he can be legitimately downgraded from an "A" grade? Can you legitimately combine these situations in arriving at your final grade?

I just don't see an "A". Finley is a good TE with great potential, and could be the best TE Green Bay has ever seen. But, today, he isn't that guy, yet. How you can give an "A" at this point in his career baffles me. You don't give A's on potential. You give them on achievement. Well, at least I do.

[get louder at lambeau]

When you have pass catching skills like Finley in our offense not being a great blocker is a very small flaw.

That reminds me of being at the opening weekend of Training Camp in 2009. The two things that really stood out were Brohm skipping balls off the ground and Finley looking like a total retard trying to block and falling on his ass. He has been reported to have improved significantly since then, but wow was he bad.

[Brandon494]

How big of a "flaw" does it have to be to not give him an "A" grade? How many games can he miss before he can be legitimately downgraded from an "A" grade? Can you legitimately combine these situations in arriving at your final grade?

I just don't see an "A". Finley is a good TE with great potential, and could be the best TE Green Bay has ever seen. But, today, he isn't that guy, yet. How you can give an "A" at this point in his career baffles me. You don't give A's on potential. You give them on achievement. Well, at least I do.

You just said he has potential to be the best TE Green Bay has ever seen and we drafted him in the 3rd round. Thats called a steal! The selection of Finley in the 3rd round is "A"! Now if someone made another thread asking to grade a player performance since arriving in Green Bay then you would get a different answer. The question asked to rate the draft, not the player.

[retailguy]

You just said he has potential to be the best TE Green Bay has ever seen and we drafted him in the 3rd round. Thats called a steal! The selection of Finley in the 3rd round is "A"! Now if someone made another thread asking to grade a player performance since arriving in Green Bay then you would get a different answer. The question asked to rate the draft, not the player.

Was Finley an excellent value for the 3rd round? It's looking that way. If he gets hurt again this year, would you change your grade? I would, and I suspect others in here would as well.

Does he get an "A" for his performance? Not from me, way too soon for that.

BTW - Flynn has the potential to be a great QB too. And he was a fantastic selection in the 7th round. You giving him an "A" too, when there is no way in hell (barring catastrophic injury) that he ever gets off the bench?

You gotta factor in more than draft position for a grade... And, imo, you gotta learn when to fight and when to stop. Might also be nice to acknowledge that others have legitimate points once in a while... but that's just my opinion.

[Deputy Nutz]

You just said he has potential to be the best TE Green Bay has ever seen and we drafted him in the 3rd round. Thats called a steal! The selection of Finley in the 3rd round is "A"! Now if someone made another thread asking to grade a player performance since arriving in Green Bay then you would get a different answer. The question asked to rate the draft, not the player.

Part of the reason you rate the draft after three years is so you can rate the player! If I wanted to rate drafts on talent potential I would be like every other jackass out their and give my draft grades 5 minutes after the end of the round.

At this point Finley is an incomplete player, sorry. Good value in the third round, good pick, but Finley hasn't proven his elite status to this point in his career. I, just like you expect a big year out of him in 2011 and when that happens and he can put all his talent into a complete season and leave all that other garbage and injuries behind him he will solidify himself as one of the best tight ends in the game and at that point who cares what draft grade some schmucks on an internet forum are haggling about.

[Tarlam!]

When you have pass catching skills like Finley in our offense not being a great blocker is a very small flaw.

It makes him a one dimensional TE. I very good one, but one dimensional non-the-less. It closes options. Defenses basicall he's the go-to-guy. He has the potential to be elite if he stays healthy, but if he could be an effective blocker, he'd be gold.

[Brandon494]

To answer your question yes I do give Fylnn an A because QB is the most important position in football and if we do trade him we would receive a lot more than a 7th. Same with Finley. Has he performed to his pontenial yet? Of course not but if we were to trade him we would most likely recieve a 1st. So drafting a player in the 3rd round who three years later now has first round value, I don't see how you can't label that an A. Also the factor that the word injury prone has yet to come up any where besides message boards. NFL GMs know the talent this guy has and if they were to redo that 2008 draft Finley wouldn't even around with our 1st round pick. BTW bringing up Finleys lack of blocking is like complaining that Clay Matthews is poor in pass coverage. Just like Clay is superior at pressuring the QB he's not going to be ask to drop back but a few times. Same with Finley being such a mismatch in the receiving game, you don't use a guy like that to block on the line very often.

[HarveyWallbangers]

It seems to me that all are saying Finley is potentially a stud when he's healthy. However, Finley has been in the league for three years. The first year he did nothing. The second year he had 56 receptions but got hurt. The third year he had 21 receptions but got hurt. He hasn't produced because he's been injured. 80-some receptions in 3 years does not equal elite YET. I think that's fair. I think most expect him to be a stud if he can play most of the games. I'd give Thompson an A grade for the pick though. He drafted an elite TE (when healthy) in the third round--after some real stiffs. Finley wasn't injury prone in college, so it's hard to fault Thompson for Finley getting injured.

[channtheman]

How big of a "flaw" does it have to be to not give him an "A" grade? How many games can he miss before he can be legitimately downgraded from an "A" grade? Can you legitimately combine these situations in arriving at your final grade?

I just don't see an "A". Finley is a good TE with great potential, and could be the best TE Green Bay has ever seen. But, today, he isn't that guy, yet. How you can give an "A" at this point in his career baffles me. You don't give A's on potential. You give them on achievement. Well, at least I do.

I like this post. We always talk about how grading a draft immediately afterwards is stupid, mainly because you are grading on potential or what you think might happen. So 3 years later and some of us are still grading on potential. We have to go with what Finley has done to this point. Right now Finley is a B, maybe. I could see arguments for grading him a C. Finley could turn into an A but he has yet to actually consistently perform on the field. He is not an A yet.

[Brandon494]

Why do we keep saying Finley has pontenial? He has already shown he has the talent of a top 5 TE. Go back and see if there is any other player you would take over Finley with that pick. If not how would you not grade it an "A"? Does anyone disagree that when healthy Finley is a top TE in the league? Does anyone think his injury last season is career ending or he's shown to be injury prone? Bottom line guy doesnt have top 5 pontenial, he is a top 5 TE who we got in the 3rd. Final grade "A"! If he was a 1st round pick I wouldn't be giving him an A but only using a 3rd come on.

[sharpe1027]

Why do we keep saying Finley has pontenial? He has already shown he has the talent of a top 5 TE. Go back and see if there is any other player you would take over Finley with that pick. If not how would you not grade it an "A"? Does anyone disagree that when healthy Finley is a top TE in the league? Does anyone think his injury last season is career ending or he's shown to be injury prone? Bottom line guy doesnt have top 5 pontenial, he is a top 5 TE who we got in the 3rd. Final grade "A"! If he was a 1st round pick I wouldn't be giving him an A but only using a 3rd come on.

This is a better way of stating what I was trying to say. Finley does not have the potential to be outstanding, he was outstanding. Now, you can try to diminish it because he was injured, but he was consistently a stud when he was on the field. That's not potential, that's his actual play.

I just don't get the comparison the Nelson, he had several good games at the end of the year, but those games were a surprise because he'd been playing all year before that at a lower level. If he plays all year and is only so-so for sixteen of the games, why would you grade him highly based only on the last few games while discounting Finley because he only had a handful of good games because of injury? I just can't say that Nelson was a better pick even with the injuries.

[pbmax]

Injuries obviously help determine the success or failure of a club and its draft picks. But only information or injuries that can be predictive should enter the discussion about whether or not a draft was conducted successfully. Was there any indication that Finley was injury prone when he was drafted? If not and if he was clean medically, this pick cannot be argued with. And the same approach that brought him to the Packers should be employed to bring more like him, because there is a good chance he will never play as many games as the Packers would like.

To me, the only way to grade a draft is to judge whether or not the strategy optimizes the team's chance for success. I think Finley passes that test unless there were medical flags that were unheeded.

After we settle this, let's debate what MVP should really mean. I like MOP better.

[Patler]

What is really being debated, the decisions on draft day or how it has turned out? I thought it was the latter.

I think a GM can make fabulous decisions on draft day that through no fault of his own don't turn out so great.
In a down year, no team might have a draft that pans out.
A good player can be minimized due to injury.

That's why I can give TT high marks for the 2008 draft even if I think that at this point it has not panned out as well as it could have or as well as it might in the future.

[sharpe1027]

What is really being debated, the decisions on draft day or how it has turned out? I thought it was the latter.

I think a GM can make fabulous decisions on draft day that through no fault of his own don't turn out so great.
In a down year, no team might have a draft that pans out.
A good player can be minimized due to injury.

That's why I can give TT high marks for the 2008 draft even if I think that at this point it has not panned out as well as it could have or as well as it might in the future.

Maybe we just need a common standard to use. I would grade a draft by asking a simple question: looking back, would you take the player at the same position (C+ to B- grade), higher (A-B grade), lower (C-D grade) or not at all (F grade).

[gbgary]

yup...A!

[Deputy Nutz]

To answer your question yes I do give Fylnn an A because QB is the most important position in football and if we do trade him we would receive a lot more than a 7th. Same with Finley. Has he performed to his pontenial yet? Of course not but if we were to trade him we would most likely recieve a 1st. So drafting a player in the 3rd round who three years later now has first round value, I don't see how you can't label that an A. Also the factor that the word injury prone has yet to come up any where besides message boards. NFL GMs know the talent this guy has and if they were to redo that 2008 draft Finley wouldn't even around with our 1st round pick. BTW bringing up Finleys lack of blocking is like complaining that Clay Matthews is poor in pass coverage. Just like Clay is superior at pressuring the QB he's not going to be ask to drop back but a few times. Same with Finley being such a mismatch in the receiving game, you don't use a guy like that to block on the line very often.


Again you are wrong comparing Finley to Clay. Clay makes an impact both on pass plays and on running plays. He is pretty good against the run, and is a hell of a pass rusher. The Packers are not stupid, they aren't going to ask Clay to drop into coverage when he is the Packers best pass rusher, just like McCarthy isn't going to keep Finley in to pass block on passing downs, but you better believe Finley is going to be asked to block during running plays. He has only been a starter for 4 games his whole career. Lee had to start in 2009 because Finley's blocking was so piss poor. Finley has improved his blocking, I am not cracking on Finley he is ultra talented and can be a better blocking if he puts his mind to it, but I am just waiting for the comment from him about being too good of a receiver to bother with blocking.

[get louder at lambeau]

I just don't get the comparison the Nelson, he had several good games at the end of the year, but those games were a surprise because he'd been playing all year before that at a lower level. If he plays all year and is only so-so for sixteen of the games, why would you grade him highly based only on the last few games while discounting Finley because he only had a handful of good games because of injury? I just can't say that Nelson was a better pick even with the injuries.

This is a look at the draft picks after three years. After three years, Jordy has more production than Finley. Both have only had a "handful of good games," in reality, without adding in the excuses for either player. In Finley's case, it was due mostly to a slow start to his career and injuries. In Nelson's case, it was mostly because he's buried at the deepest position on the roster and has been used as a returner due to roster needs on STs and depth at WR. But those are the "reasons" or "excuses" or whatever you want to call them.

ACTUAL MEASURABLE PRODUCTION TO THIS POINT, NOT COUNTING POTENTIAL OR EXCUSES
Nelson- 122 catches, 1565 yards, 8 TDs (and 58 kick returns for 1339 yards, 23.1 avg, 17 punt returns for 90 yards, 5.3 avg)
Finley- 88 catches, 1210 yards, 7 TDs

Their average yards per catch and yards per game played are very similar.

[sharpe1027]

This is a look at the draft picks after three years. After three years, Jordy has more production than Finley. Both have only had a "handful of good games," in reality, without adding in the excuses for either player. In Finley's case, it was due mostly to a slow start to his career and injuries. In Nelson's case, it was mostly because he's buried at the deepest position on the roster and has been used as a returner due to roster needs on STs and depth at WR. But those are the "reasons" or "excuses" or whatever you want to call them.

ACTUAL MEASURABLE PRODUCTION TO THIS POINT, NOT COUNTING POTENTIAL OR EXCUSES
Nelson- 122 catches, 1565 yards, 8 TDs (and 58 kick returns for 1339 yards, 23.1 avg, 17 punt returns for 90 yards, 5.3 avg)
Finley- 88 catches, 1210 yards, 7 TDs

Their average yards per catch and yards per game played are very similar.

Nelson has never even played his way into a starting job. I personally don't think that is equivalent to an injury, but that's just a point that we can agree to disagree on.

If you could go back an re-draft, would you draft Nelson in the first round? Would you draft Finley in the second?

[Guiness]

Nelson has never even played his way into a starting job. I personally don't think that is equivalent to an injury, but that's just a point that we can agree to disagree on.

If you could go back an re-draft, would you draft Nelson in the first round? Would you draft Finley in the second?

Don't play that game. We got them where we got them, and it's worked out pretty well in both cases.

Want to go back? I want Barry Sanders instead of The Incredible Bulk.

A better question when you're looking at pasts drafts would be 'where would this player go if the draft was held again?' I think Finley would be a late first/early second, Nelson possibly the same or later in the second.

While Nelson hasn't become a star, it was a thin WR draft, and as the 3rd WR taken, he's done well. Better than one of those taken ahead of him (Devin Thomas) and I'd say there were only three clearly better WR's in the draft, and 1 or 2 that are on the same level as him.

[sharpe1027]

Don't play that game. We got them where we got them, and it's worked out pretty well in both cases.

Want to go back? I want Barry Sanders instead of The Incredible Bulk.

A better question when you're looking at pasts drafts would be 'where would this player go if the draft was held again?' I think Finley would be a late first/early second, Nelson possibly the same or later in the second.

While Nelson hasn't become a star, it was a thin WR draft, and as the 3rd WR taken, he's done well. Better than one of those taken ahead of him (Devin Thomas) and I'd say there were only three clearly better WR's in the draft, and 1 or 2 that are on the same level as him.

Isn't that what I said? I said "re-draft" and you said "the draft was held again." I don't understand what hair you are are splitting, but regardless, your analysis answers my question.

Using the standard I mentioned above, Finley could be graded as a better pick than Nelson because, in hindsight, you would have picked Finley two rounds above where he went, whereas you would have picked Nelson a below where he went.

[mraynrand]

Why do we keep saying Finley has potential?

Because people are talking two kinds of potential - his physical skill/talent potential, and his potential to produce for the team. There is no question about the first (except perhaps for blocking), but there is question about the second. There is no substitute for PRODUCTION on the field. In that area Finley is about the same as Nelson - as pointed out above. IF he suffers no further injuries, and stays with the team, I believe his production will be outstanding.

[mraynrand]

Using the standard I mentioned above, Finley could be graded as a better pick than Nelson because, in hindsight, you would have picked Finley two rounds above where he went, whereas you would have picked Nelson a below where he went.

A little quibble - Nelson has yet to prove unworthy of a top second round pick. He very well may be your #2 WR in GB for a long time to come. If so, isn't that worth a second round pick?

[sharpe1027]

The only argument I have seen that they have the same production requires me to ignore anything other than pure statistics. I don't think you can grade the draft that way.

[sharpe1027]

A little quibble - Nelson has yet to prove unworthy of a top second round pick. He very well may be your #2 WR in GB for a long time to come. If so, isn't that worth a second round pick?

A fair point, and that would mean that your grading would be different from Guiness' grading, but not so much that Nelson would be viewed as the better pick.

[mraynrand]

The only argument I have seen that they have the same production requires me to ignore anything other than pure statistics. I don't think you can grade the draft that way.


You can't evaluate the impact of a football player on statistics alone. Finley could return be routinely double-teamed/be the focus of the other team's defensive game planning, and open up the entire offense for other players. That doesn't show up on a stat sheet.

[get louder at lambeau]

Nelson has never even played his way into a starting job. I personally don't think that is equivalent to an injury, but that's just a point that we can agree to disagree on.

If you could go back an re-draft, would you draft Nelson in the first round? Would you draft Finley in the second?

They didn't exactly have the same mountain to climb as far as becoming the starter. Finley came into a roster where he needed to beat out Donald Lee and Tory Humphrey, while Nelson had Driver, Jennings, Jones, and Ruvell Martin as the incumbents to beat. Big difference.

One thing I mentioned in passing above that people should take notice of as well- Nelson and Finley have similar yards per game played and per reception. Maybe next year those will change, but over their current NFL careers, Jordy has produced just about as well as Finely on a per game and per reception basis. I think many would be surprised by that.

[get louder at lambeau]

You can't evaluate the impact of a football player on statistics alone. Finley could return be routinely double-teamed/be the focus of the other team's defensive game planning, and open up the entire offense for other players. That doesn't show up on a stat sheet.


But that hasn't been true in general. Look at the highlights of Finley I posted. He doesn't get doubled anywhere near as much as his fan created legend would have you believe. His catches are generally against LBs or single safeties or CBs. Our offense throws too many weapons at the D for them to just continuously double a TE.

[sharpe1027]

They didn't exactly have the same mountain to climb as far as becoming the starter. Finley came into a roster where he needed to beat out Donald Lee and Tory Humphrey, while Nelson had Driver, Jennings, Jones, and Ruvell Martin as the incumbents to beat. Big difference.

One thing I mentioned in passing above that people should take notice of as well- Nelson and Finley have similar yards per game played and per reception. Maybe next year those will change, but over their current NFL careers, Jordy has produced just about as well as Finely on a per game and per reception basis. I think many would be surprised by that.

Apples and Oranges. Finley's average/reception would put him about 5th in the league in yards per reception for TEs (although he doesn't qualify under ESPN's list because of the # of games played). Nelson barely makes the top 50 for WRs.

[Guiness]

Apples and Oranges. Finley's average/reception would put him about 5th in the league in yards per reception for TEs (although he doesn't qualify under ESPN's list because of the # of games played). Nelson barely makes the top 50 for WRs.

*ding ding ding* we have a winner.

You can't compare Finley and Nelson's numbers that way.

Remember the year Colston came into the league? Yahoo sports had him as a TE in the fantasy league. That guy single handedly won guys pools (including someone in my PR bracket, Red I believe?) because they could use WR numbers in a TE slot.

[Guiness]

Isn't that what I said? I said "re-draft" and you said "the draft was held again." I don't understand what hair you are are splitting, but regardless, your analysis answers my question.

Using the standard I mentioned above, Finley could be graded as a better pick than Nelson because, in hindsight, you would have picked Finley two rounds above where he went, whereas you would have picked Nelson a below where he went.

Yes, I kind of went 'round in a circle there.

What I hate is when someone says: "we should've taken this guy instead", which I see now you didn't do.

It's easy to do that, DeSean Jackson or Eddie Royal would both look pretty good in G&G. Regardless of them, however, Nelson was not taken that much too high, if at all.

[sharpe1027]

Yes, I kind of went 'round in a circle there.

What I hate is when someone says: "we should've taken this guy instead", which I see now you didn't do.

It's easy to do that, DeSean Jackson or Eddie Royal would both look pretty good in G&G. Regardless of them, however, Nelson was not taken that much too high, if at all.

Gotcha and no I did not meant to suggest picking someone else. I agree that Nelson was not taken much too high, but by comparison Finley was taken much too low.

[get louder at lambeau]

Apples and Oranges. Finley's average/reception would put him about 5th in the league in yards per reception for TEs (although he doesn't qualify under ESPN's list because of the # of games played). Nelson barely makes the top 50 for WRs.

So, do you think they'll give you more points for a TD from a TE then? Or you'll need less yards for a first down if a TE catches the ball?

The reason less production normally comes from TEs is because they are often blockers more than receivers. Half OL, half WR.

Finley rarely blocks, and isn't very good at it. He is a big receiver. He even lines up as a WR sometimes. If he was a well rounded TE, I'd agree with you, but he isn't. They could line Jordy up as a TE and never have him block, just like Finley, and he'd be a top 5 TE too.

[Bossman641]

The issue here is that everyone’s grading scale is different. Patler’s is based on actual production since the draft. Ignoring everything else, when you look at pure numbers, Finley’s contribution hasn’t been that significant due to a slow start and injuries. With that said, Patler acknowledges that Finley was a great pick and just needs to stay healthy.

Brandon’s grading is based around [(potential + value) / round). Potential is probably even the wrong word, because we have seen Finley already perform consistently. He just needs to stay healthy and on the field.

Looking at the 2008 draft, I can find a few players who have been more productive than Finley that were drafted after him – Garcon, Hillis, Manningham, Avril (arguably). I don’t think they are better than Finley, and I would still take Finley at that spot, but I can see how an argument can be made for a C+, B- grade for Finley.

[sharpe1027]

So, do you think they'll give you more points for a TD from a TE then? Or you'll need less yards for a first down if a TE catches the ball?

The reason less production normally comes from TEs is because they are often blockers more than receivers. Finley rarely blocks, and isn't very good at it. He is a big receiver. He even lines up as a WR sometimes. If he was a well rounded TE, I'd agree with you, but he isn't. They could line Jordy up as a TE and never have him block, just like Finley, and he'd be a top 5 TE too.

I give up. If you think Jordy can play TE in the NFL, I will just have to disagree.

[get louder at lambeau]

I give up. If you think Jordy can play TE in the NFL, I will just have to disagree.

What does Finley do except run routes and catch passes? What about that couldn't Jordy do? It's not like Finley is an inline blocker.

[get louder at lambeau]

I should probably point out again that I don't think Nelson is as talented as Finley. I think he has been more valuable over the three years since being drafted than Finley has.

I expect both of them to have great years next year, and wouldn't be surprised to see Finley outproduce Nelson at all. As of right now, however, he has not significantly outproduced Nelson on a career basis, per game basis, or per catch basis. A full, healthy season for Finley could well change that. I expect that both of their numbers will go up significantly next year.

[sharpe1027]

What does Finley do except run routes and catch passes? What about that couldn't Jordy do? It's not like Finley is an inline blocker.

He plays TE, which includes lining up just outside of the tackle and blocking on run plays. Finley has 30 lbs and several inches on Jordy. I don't think you will find many people that think that Jordy could lineup in the same positions as Finley. Just because Finley is ALSO able to lineup wide, doesn't mean that Jordy can lineup as a TE in the NFL. Contrary to what seems the popular belief here, Finley doesn't just run routes. Finley is often asked to block LBers and even DEs and he's decent at it. Can you say the same for Jordy?

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/2340/packers-finley-is-the-real-deal
"coach Mike McCarthy said Finley's blocking skills have improved to the point where he can be deployed in any formation and for any role."

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/104191139.html
The fact that Finley missed blocks on two running plays Monday night in Chicago doesn't mean he isn't a solid blocker, according to position coach Ben McAdoo. It just means he had two bad blocks.
...
Those were the first two "bad" runs that Finley was responsible for this season.

[get louder at lambeau]

Contrary to what seems the popular belief here, Finley doesn't just run routes. Finley is often asked to block LBers and even DEs and he's decent at it. Can you say the same for Jordy?

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/2340/packers-finley-is-the-real-deal
"coach Mike McCarthy said Finley's blocking skills have improved to the point where he can be deployed in any formation and for any role."

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/104191139.html
The fact that Finley missed blocks on two running plays Monday night in Chicago doesn't mean he isn't a solid blocker, according to position coach Ben McAdoo. It just means he had two bad blocks.
...
Those were the first two "bad" runs that Finley was responsible for this season.

Right around the time that first article was put out in 2009, I watched Finley live at Training Camp. He made great catches but was the worst blocker out there by far. I remember watching him literally fall on his ass while missing a block like a total retard. Bad. I can't overstate how bad it was.

The second article is a story about him missing blocks, and his position coach stands up for him after a game where he sucked at blocking. I'm not sure how that's supposed to prove he's a good blocker. Sounds like any coach defending their player from reporters who are attacking his failures. I'm not sure how many "bad runs" he's allowed to be responsible for before it counts as being a bad blocker either. Or how many "good runs" he was part of. I know our running game sucked pretty bad during those first four games when Finley played this year though.

Maybe I'm underestimating his blocking based on what I saw two years ago. From what I remember, it seems like the Packers usually used Crabtree to run behind this year and took Finley off the field or sent him out on a pass pattern. There is no denying that he is a pass catching TE and not a traditional blocking TE though. He always was from the start. To pretend that he blocks as much as, and as well as, a traditional TE is just not true. To compare his stats to that type of TE is at least as wrong as comparing him to a WR.

Jordy, on the other hand, is known to be our best blocking WR. I was joking about moving him to TE, of course. I do think he could do what Finley does though. Finley is a receiver, just like Jordy. Where he starts his route is the only difference. Again, I think Finley is more talented than Jordy is. I just don't think it's anywhere near as big a gap as some do.

[Brandon494]

I know that sounds ignorant since Cobb has yet to even step on the field but I believe Randall Cobb will be our future #2 reciever over Nelson. I don't have any stats to back this up I just know talent when I see it and Cobb is going to be a fast fan favorite.

[get louder at lambeau]

I know that sounds ignorant since Cobb has yet to even step on the field but I believe Randall Cobb will be our future #2 reciever over Nelson. I don't have any stats to back this up I just know talent when I see it and Cobb is going to be a fast fan favorite.

I hope you're right. That would be awesome if he turned out to be that good. Fuck, I hope he becomes our new #1 for that matter. For now, my money is still on Jordy as the #2.

[sharpe1027]

Compared to other TEs, Finley is on the pass catching side. Compared other WRs, Jordy is on the blocking side. Compared to each other, no comparison. If Jordy could do what Finley does why did we have to suffer through a season of poor play from Quarless? Shouldn't they have just moved Jordy to that spot? Instead, they struggled for several weeks trying to adjust an offense that was geared around that position and what Finley could do.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/29666/no-overstating-the-loss-of-jermichael-finley

"The Packers built their entire offense around him this season. They knew his exceptional speed and ball skills made him almost impossible for defenses to account for, and felt his blocking skills had progressed to the point where he could be trusted to play on every down."

Also, if you read the article you say doesn't show anything, you will notice two things:
1) He was trying to block Julius Freakin Peppers. Peppers has made seasoned linemen look foolish. Do you have any examples of Jordy trying to block a guy like Peppers?
2) They said it was the only bad run plays all year.

In the end, I just don't buy your opinion that Jordy would be just fine in Finley's position. It doesn't jive with what I see when they are on the field. They look like two totally different players. More importantly, nothing I've read from coaches, scouts or writers that backs up what you are trying to tell me. IDK, maybe we can just agree to disagree on this point?

[get louder at lambeau]

Compared to other TEs, Finley is on the pass catching side. Compared other WRs, Jordy is on the blocking side. Compared to each other, no comparison. If Jordy could do what Finley does why did we have to suffer through a season of poor play from Quarless? Shouldn't they have just moved Jordy to that spot? Instead, they struggled for several weeks trying to adjust an offense that was geared around that position and what Finley could do.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/29666/no-overstating-the-loss-of-jermichael-finley

"The Packers built their entire offense around him this season. They knew his exceptional speed and ball skills made him almost impossible for defenses to account for, and felt his blocking skills had progressed to the point where he could be trusted to play on every down."

Also, if you read the article you say doesn't show anything, you will notice two things:
1) He was trying to block Julius Freakin Peppers. Pepper's has made seasoned linemen look foolish. Do you have any examples of Jordy trying to block a guy like Peppers?
2) He said it was the only two bad run all year.

In the end, I just don't buy your opinion that Jordy would be just fine in Finley's position. It doesn't jive with what I see when they are on the field. They look like two totally different players. More importantly, nothing I've read from coaches, scouts or writers backs up what you are trying to tell me. IDK, maybe we can just agree to disagree on this point?

I already said I was joking about Jordy playing TE. As far as blocking Peppers, yes, I think Nelson could fail at blocking him just as well as Finley did. ;)

My WHOLE point here has been about Jordy being undervalued and Finley overvalued in comparison to each other, NOT that Jordy is better than Finley. I have said it over and over.

Here's a site that has some love for Jordy AND Finley- Football Outsiders (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr).

They rank Jordy #40 in DYAR and #22 in DVOA, their 2 main stats. Considering that there are 32 #1 WRs and 64 starting WRs in the NFL, they seem to be saying that he's clearly a staring caliber WR, ranking somewhere near the bottom of #1 WRs or top of #2 WRs. Jennings gets #3 and #7 in those stats, Jones #52 and #61 (also starting caliber), and Driver comes in last of the big four GB WRs at a still respectable #71 and #68.

Finley blows it up in the TE stats, which is unsurprising because they are based on receiving numbers only, since there are no real blocking stats, coming in at #13 and #2.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I know that sounds ignorant since Cobb has yet to even step on the field but I believe Randall Cobb will be our future #2 reciever over Nelson. I don't have any stats to back this up I just know talent when I see it and Cobb is going to be a fast fan favorite.

I don't see it. Cobb isn't Greg Jennings, and I think he'd be miscast as an #2 (outside) receiver. Dude has the potential to be a good slot receiver though.

[Brandon494]

I don't see it. Cobb isn't Greg Jennings, and I think he'd be miscast as an #2 (outside) receiver. Dude has the potential to be a good slot receiver though.

Who said anything about Jennings? Their games are nothing alike so I agree he's not Greg Jennings but he will be the future #2 receiver for the Packers. If you want to compare him to a receiver then think of Hines Ward.

[sharpe1027]

I already said I was joking about Jordy playing TE. As far as blocking Peppers, yes, I think Nelson could fail at blocking him just as well as Finley did. ;)

My WHOLE point here has been about Jordy being undervalued and Finley overvalued in comparison to each other, NOT that Jordy is better than Finley. I have said it over and over.

Here's a site that has some love for Jordy AND Finley- Football Outsiders (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr).

They rank Jordy #40 in DYAR and #22 in DVOA, their 2 main stats. Considering that there are 32 #1 WRs and 64 starting WRs in the NFL, they seem to be saying that he's clearly a staring caliber WR, ranking somewhere near the bottom of #1 WRs or top of #2 WRs. Jennings gets #3 and #7 in those stats, Jones #52 and #61 (also starting caliber), and Driver comes in last of the big four GB WRs at a still respectable #71 and #68.

Finley blows it up in the TE stats, which is unsurprising because they are based on receiving numbers only, since there are no real blocking stats, coming in at #13 and #2.

I can understand the point that Jordy is undervalued and Finley is overvalued.

I still disagree with the premise of some of your explanations. For example, I don't agree that a straight comparison of statistics (such as total yards over three years) shows that Jordy was more productive. I also disagree that Finley should get no credit for blocking in situations that they would never put Jordy in.

Is that fair? I think we've gotten pretty close to agreeing in substance.

[get louder at lambeau]

I can understand the point that Jordy is undervalued and Finley is overvalued.

I still disagree with the premise of some of your explanations. For example, I don't agree that a straight comparison of statistics (such as total yards over three years) shows that Jordy was more productive. I also disagree that Finley should get no credit for blocking in situations that they would never put Jordy in.

Is that fair? I think we've gotten pretty close to agreeing in substance.

Yeah, we're pretty close. I can't think of an example of Finley ever really blocking well, and I don't think he's asked to do it much, but that's about it. Receivers are receivers to me, unless they are old school TEs that are used to block more than token amounts. Finley is just a huge WR who they move around in my mind. That's what I see him do on the field. Besides that, I think we're on the same basic page.

[mraynrand]

But that hasn't been true in general. Look at the highlights of Finley I posted. He doesn't get doubled anywhere near as much as his fan created legend would have you believe. His catches are generally against LBs or single safeties or CBs. Our offense throws too many weapons at the D for them to just continuously double a TE.

That may be true. Or not. Double, single, zone, whatever, if they throw up a scheme specifically to neutralize Finley over another WR, that's significant. The point is that - true or not - it's part of the evaluation, apart from stats.

[get louder at lambeau]

That may be true. Or not. Double, single, zone, whatever, if they throw up a scheme specifically to neutralize Finley over another WR, that's significant. The point is that - true or not - it's part of the evaluation, apart from stats.

The guy I would scheme against if I was going up against the Packers is Greg Jennings. No question. Not even close. The guy with 45 TDs and almost 6000 yards in 5 years, not the guy with a little over 100 yards and 7 TDs in three years.

Finley is the beneficiary of teams scheming against Jennings and not being able to scheme against him, just like Jordy in the Super Bowl, IMO. Jennings is one of the absolute best weapons in the NFL- #2 in TDs and #4 in receiving yards in the league this year, and he has torn up defenses for years.

[mraynrand]

You make good points. Still, teams did scheme for Finley. It's pretty obvious in the opener at Philly last year. But this is minor detail. Finley, Jennings, Cobb in the slot and Nelson at the other WR. As others have noted, there is no way even the best defenses can cover all this. With reasonable protection, Rodgers will carve up the opposition.

[Brandon494]

The guy I would scheme against if I was going up against the Packers is Greg Jennings. No question. Not even close. The guy with 45 TDs and almost 6000 yards in 5 years, not the guy with a little over 100 yards and 7 TDs in three years.

Finley is the beneficiary of teams scheming against Jennings and not being able to scheme against him, just like Jordy in the Super Bowl, IMO. Jennings is one of the absolute best weapons in the NFL- #2 in TDs and #4 in receiving yards in the league this year, and he has torn up defenses for years.

And that's why your not a defense coordinator. You keep giving us all these stats but stats do not tell the whole story. When healthy it's no question the offense goes thru Finley. Look for ARod TD passes to increase by 8-10 IF Finley plays the whole season.

[mraynrand]

Who said anything about Jennings? Their games are nothing alike so I agree he's not Greg Jennings but he will be the future #2 receiver for the Packers. If you want to compare him to a receiver then think of Hines Ward.

And Cobb is nothing like Nelson either. Complimentary players that will make headaches for defenses. #2 as in starter or #2 as in production - it all depends on how McCarthy wants to use him. Whether that will be true this year, depends on how fast the labor dispute gets solved and how quick he picks things up. You have to believe McCarthy is sitting there in GB, drawing up packages with featuring Cobb and then banging his head against a wall because he doesn't know when the guy will be available.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Who said anything about Jennings? Their games are nothing alike so I agree he's not Greg Jennings but he will be the future #2 receiver for the Packers. If you want to compare him to a receiver then think of Hines Ward.

He's not going to be Jennings or Ward, IMHO. I don't see him being an outside receiver. Jennings and Ward can play outside (well, Ward when he was younger). That will mean that he's going to be mostly utilized in the slot. They are going to need Jennings and another receiver in two WR sets. I'm guessing that they'll get a long-term deal done with Nelson, and it will be Jennings and Nelson on the outside with Cobb mostly playing in the slot in 3 WR sets (in addition to putting him in the backfield and other gimmicky stuff).

[get louder at lambeau]

And that's why your not a defense coordinator. You keep giving us all these stats but stats do not tell the whole story. When healthy it's no question the offense goes thru Finley. Look for ARod TD passes to increase by 8-10 IF Finley plays the whole season.

And you ARE a "defense coordinator"? I didn't realize. Please enlighten us with how you would defend against the Packer offense, if you wouldn't mind.

If a defensive coordinator took my approach against them, the Packer offense WOULD go through Finley, because the D would be busy keying on Jennings and Finley would be running routes against LBs a lot of the time. Hmmm... That sounds strangely similar to what Finley's highlights show.

[Brandon494]

He's not going to be Jennings or Ward, IMHO. I don't see him being an outside receiver. Jennings and Ward can play outside (well, Ward when he was younger). That will mean that he's going to be mostly utilized in the slot. They are going to need Jennings and another receiver in two WR sets. I'm guessing that they'll get a long-term deal done with Nelson, and it will be Jennings and Nelson on the outside with Cobb mostly playing in the slot in 3 WR sets (in addition to putting him in the backfield and other gimmicky stuff).

Watch this video and explain to me why he can't play on the outside. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i09R2AWgFU

Right now obvisouly he will be used as a slot guy with Driver still being the #2 WR next season. I've watch Jordy for three seasons now and while he is a good football player he is nothing special. The special catches that you see Jennings and Driver make several times each season I've never once seen Nelson make. Cobb has the ability to be special and I'm usually right when it comes to projecting talent.

[Brandon494]

And you ARE a "defense coordinator"? I didn't realize. Please enlighten us with how you would defend against the Packer offense, if you wouldn't mind.

If a defensive coordinator took my approach against them, the Packer offense WOULD go through Finley, because the D would be busy keying on Jennings and Finley would be running routes against LBs a lot of the time. Hmmm... That sounds strangely similar to what Finley's highlights show.

When Finley was in the game Jennings would get one and one coverage because they would always have to use a safety to help out on Finley. Finley is too big to be covered by a CB and too fast to be covered by a LB. Hes a matchup nightmare and teams focus on stoping him before Jennings, atleast they did early in the season last year before he went down.

http://packersinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/finley-swarmed.jpg

[Guiness]

And Cobb is nothing like Nelson either. Complimentary players that will make headaches for defenses. #2 as in starter or #2 as in production - it all depends on how McCarthy wants to use him. Whether that will be true this year, depends on how fast the labor dispute gets solved and how quick he picks things up. You have to believe McCarthy is sitting there in GB, drawing up packages with featuring Cobb and then banging his head against a wall because he doesn't know when the guy will be available.

Or going crazy because he doesn't know if Cobb is going to be closer to Corey Rodgers or Corey Bradford.

[Deputy Nutz]

This thread is queer. Brandon is a thread killer.

[get louder at lambeau]

When Finley was in the game Jennings would get one and one coverage because they would always have to use a safety to help out on Finley. Finley is too big to be covered by a CB and too fast to be covered by a LB. Hes a matchup nightmare and teams focus on stoping him before Jennings, atleast they did early in the season last year before he went down.

Here are the highlights of that game with your pic of Finley. Unfortunately they are more Vick than Finley or Jennings.
Watch Jennings at 2:45. Jennings on one side, Finley and two WRs on the other side, and Jennings draws a CB and a safety, beats them both deep for a TD. They weren't using the safety to help out on Finley there. He was over Jennings. Finley is single covered by the MLB after getting bumped and released at the line.-
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010091210/2010/REG1/packers@eagles/watch

Next game, Bills. Finley beats #90, a FORMER DEFENSIVE END, man to man for a 32 yard catch. The announcer says, "Might as well put a nose tackle on him." Is that how you "focus on stopping" someone?-
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010091901/2010/REG2/bills@packers/watch

Teams obviously want to stop all our guys, especially Jennings and Finley. They are both weapons. so are Jordy, Jones, and Driver. They can't stop them all, so they have to choose their poison. If I'm going against the Packers, stopping Jennings is job 1. Finley is a close 2nd. Either way, as an opposing DC, you are probably screwed.

[mraynrand]

Or going crazy because he doesn't know if Cobb is going to be closer to Corey Rodgers or Corey Bradford.


Or Corey Haim

http://blog.commarts.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Haim-in-Lucas-300x222.jpghttp://foodcourtlunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/lucas.jpg

[mraynrand]

Next game, Bills. Finley beats #90, a FORMER DEFENSIVE END, man to man for a 32 yard catch. The announcer says, "Might as well put a nose tackle on him." Is that how you "focus on stopping" someone?


Is was the Bills, after all.

[sharpe1027]

And you ARE a "defense coordinator"? I didn't realize. Please enlighten us with how you would defend against the Packer offense, if you wouldn't mind.

If a defensive coordinator took my approach against them, the Packer offense WOULD go through Finley, because the D would be busy keying on Jennings and Finley would be running routes against LBs a lot of the time. Hmmm... That sounds strangely similar to what Finley's highlights show.

You're right and wrong, the Bills were in single coverage against Finley for much of the game, and he had over 100 yards that game. Philly had a different plan and double and triple covered him all the time. And this isn't my opinion or from me watching highlights, it is from Rodgers.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/103255889.html

A week after being swarmed with defenders by the Philadelphia Eagles, the Green Bay Packers tight end actually saw the light of day against the Buffalo Bills, who were not as intent on double- and triple-teaming him Sunday in the Packers' 34-7 victory.
...
quarterback Aaron Rodgers said: "Philadelphia's game plan was really to double him at all times, so we've looked at some ways to get him in better matchups."

[channtheman]

When Finley was in the game Jennings would get one and one coverage because they would always have to use a safety to help out on Finley. Finley is too big to be covered by a CB and too fast to be covered by a LB. Hes a matchup nightmare and teams focus on stoping him before Jennings, atleast they did early in the season last year before he went down.

http://packersinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/finley-swarmed.jpg

When Finley went down, did anyone else notice Rodgers play went up? The above picture demonstrates this very well. Rodgers (to me at least) seemed to be forcing the ball to Finley constantly in the first four games. So much so that he threw into triple coverage when he had no business doing so. I don't know if Rodgers was trying to keep Finley happy or what, but Finley getting hurt may be the reason we won the Super Bowl this year, as crazy as that sounds.

[Tarlam!]

No, that doesn't sound crazy. It sounds a lot like the "Booby Miles" syndrome.

[Brandon494]

I do believe Rodgers was trying to force the ball to Finley at times but I believe we were struggling due to having no running game and Rodgers starting off slow. Finley going down did not help this team win the Super Bowl, we barely made it in. With Finley we win the division IMO but who cares we still the champs!

[get louder at lambeau]

Finley going down did not help this team win the Super Bowl,

There's something we can agree on. The more weapons the better. The other tight ends were below average as receivers. Hopefully the two new draft picks will help build up the position to one with real depth, instead of one with a superstar and some scrubs. Quarless should be better this year too.

[King Friday]

I would certainly agree that Finley going down did not help the Packers in winning a world championship. However, considering the dynamic that played out as the season wore on, I think it is safe to say that the loss of Finley did help the passing game stop relying on "talent" and start relying on "team".

That isn't meant to be said in a negative way. In many ways, I think the change was very similar to what happened in Green Bay after Sterling Sharpe's career came to an abrupt end. Favre relied TOO heavily on Sharpe early in his career and even though it was successful to a point, an offense operates more efficiently when everyone contributes to production within the scope of the offense.

Once Favre learned to operate WITHIN THE OFFENSE rather than focus almost exclusively on Sharpe, he became the MVP caliber QB that dominated the league...and lesser talents like Robert Brooks, Mark Chmura and Edgar Bennett were more than able to "carry the load" as the sum of the parts proved far greater than one HOF caliber WR talent. Losing Sharpe didn't help Green Bay win anything...but it did sharpen the focus of everyone else and helped build the team.

I don't think it is just coincidence that we saw Rodgers grow up in much the same way last year after losing Grant and Finley. Football remains a TEAM game. Having superstars is great...and necessary...but superstars only function best when surrounded by role players who are reliable and can even stand out on occasion. While the offense certainly is better off having a talent like Finley on the field, it isn't better if Finley is the primary focus most of the time.

Bottom line, this offense is not designed to be played through one player...as some suggest we should do with Finley. This offense is designed to create favorable matchups that can free up various players depending on how the defense reacts. The defense may decide to take Finley away...so be it. Then Jennings or Driver or Nelson are free to make plays.

Focusing on one player and forcing the action is always a mistake in football.

[channtheman]

Thank you King Friday. That's the gist of what I was trying to say, but you said it better than I could ever have.

[Pugger]

I would certainly agree that Finley going down did not help the Packers in winning a world championship. However, considering the dynamic that played out as the season wore on, I think it is safe to say that the loss of Finley did help the passing game stop relying on "talent" and start relying on "team".

That isn't meant to be said in a negative way. In many ways, I think the change was very similar to what happened in Green Bay after Sterling Sharpe's career came to an abrupt end. Favre relied TOO heavily on Sharpe early in his career and even though it was successful to a point, an offense operates more efficiently when everyone contributes to production within the scope of the offense.

Once Favre learned to operate WITHIN THE OFFENSE rather than focus almost exclusively on Sharpe, he became the MVP caliber QB that dominated the league...and lesser talents like Robert Brooks, Mark Chmura and Edgar Bennett were more than able to "carry the load" as the sum of the parts proved far greater than one HOF caliber WR talent. Losing Sharpe didn't help Green Bay win anything...but it did sharpen the focus of everyone else and helped build the team.

I don't think it is just coincidence that we saw Rodgers grow up in much the same way last year after losing Grant and Finley. Football remains a TEAM game. Having superstars is great...and necessary...but superstars only function best when surrounded by role players who are reliable and can even stand out on occasion. While the offense certainly is better off having a talent like Finley on the field, it isn't better if Finley is the primary focus most of the time.

Bottom line, this offense is not designed to be played through one player...as some suggest we should do with Finley. This offense is designed to create favorable matchups that can free up various players depending on how the defense reacts. The defense may decide to take Finley away...so be it. Then Jennings or Driver or Nelson are free to make plays.

Focusing on one player and forcing the action is always a mistake in football.

+1 :bclap:

[ThunderDan]

Here are the highlights of that game with your pic of Finley. Unfortunately they are more Vick than Finley or Jennings.
Watch Jennings at 2:45. Jennings on one side, Finley and two WRs on the other side, and Jennings draws a CB and a safety, beats them both deep for a TD. They weren't using the safety to help out on Finley there. He was over Jennings. Finley is single covered by the MLB after getting bumped and released at the line.-
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010091210/2010/REG1/packers@eagles/watch

Next game, Bills. Finley beats #90, a FORMER DEFENSIVE END, man to man for a 32 yard catch. The announcer says, "Might as well put a nose tackle on him." Is that how you "focus on stopping" someone?-
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010091901/2010/REG2/bills@packers/watch

Teams obviously want to stop all our guys, especially Jennings and Finley. They are both weapons. so are Jordy, Jones, and Driver. They can't stop them all, so they have to choose their poison. If I'm going against the Packers, stopping Jennings is job 1. Finley is a close 2nd. Either way, as an opposing DC, you are probably screwed.

Sorry GLL, but I can't draw that conclusion from that angle on the GJ touchdown against the Eagles. To me you could almost argue that the safety didn't drop back far enough because he was afraid of Finley getting a release and running free across the middle of the field. That put him 5 yards out of postion and he was no where near the play at the end. If the safety was truely in coverage over the top he wouldn't have been beaten by that much.

[pbmax]

Sorry GLL, but I can't draw that conclusion from that angle on the GJ touchdown against the Eagles. To me you could almost argue that the safety didn't drop back far enough because he was afraid of Finley getting a release and running free across the middle of the field. That put him 5 yards out of postion and he was no where near the play at the end. If the safety was truely in coverage over the top he wouldn't have been beaten by that much.

That wasn't double coverage on Jennings, it was 2 deep safeties. Jennings was covered by a single man on the LOS. Finley stayed in to block (if I am seeing him on the right side next to Tausch) and then ran a shallow route.

And I do not buy the Finley gets hurt and the ball gets spread around theory. Finley was featured early, but then it was Driver until he got nicked up. Then it was Jennings. I would bet Jennings was targeted late in the season as often as Finley was early in the season.

It took a while for the offense to adjust to no run game and then no Finley. But while Finley was in the lineup (4 complete games) the Packers averaged 26.25 points per game. Without him (11 complete) they averaged 24.45.

[get louder at lambeau]

That wasn't double coverage on Jennings, it was 2 deep safeties. Jennings was covered by a single man on the LOS. Finley stayed in to block (if I am seeing him on the right side next to Tausch) and then ran a shallow route.

Yep. But he was the only receiver on that side of the field, with a CB and a deep safety. Finley, Driver, Jones, and Brandon Jackson were ALL on the other side of center. When the ball was released, the only Eagle anywhere near Finley was the MLB, while Jennings got deep on the CB and one of the 2 deep safeties.

Brandon was saying that they were keying on Finley, and keeping an extra safety on him. Not on that play. The safety might have taken a false step or hesitated because of Finley, as Thunder Dan pointed out as possible above. Can't really say for sure what the safety did from that camera angle either way. He's not the first deep safety Jennings got behind though. I CAN say for sure that the only guy anywhere near Finley was the MLB, just like in most of his highlights, where it's him and one LB.

[sharpe1027]

Yep. But he was the only receiver on that side of the field, with a CB and a deep safety. Finley, Driver, Jones, and Brandon Jackson were ALL on the other side of center. When the ball was released, the only Eagle anywhere near Finley was the MLB, while Jennings got deep on the CB and one of the 2 deep safeties.

Brandon was saying that they were keying on Finley, and keeping an extra safety on him. Not on that play. The safety might have taken a false step or hesitated because of Finley, as Thunder Dan pointed out as possible above. Can't really say for sure what the safety did from that camera angle either way. He's not the first deep safety Jennings got behind though. I CAN say for sure that the only guy anywhere near Finley was the MLB, just like in most of his highlights, where it's him and one LB.

If you watch the clip, the safety is turned inside and looking toward the middle of the field. There's little doubt that he was watching for someone other than Jennings down the middle first. His first responsibility was not to Jennings..or he blew his responsibility.

[mraynrand]

That wasn't double coverage on Jennings, it was 2 deep safeties. Jennings was covered by a single man on the LOS. Finley stayed in to block (if I am seeing him on the right side next to Tausch) and then ran a shallow route.

And I do not buy the Finley gets hurt and the ball gets spread around theory. Finley was featured early, but then it was Driver until he got nicked up. Then it was Jennings. I would bet Jennings was targeted late in the season as often as Finley was early in the season.

It took a while for the offense to adjust to no run game and then no Finley. But while Finley was in the lineup (4 complete games) the Packers averaged 26.25 points per game. Without him (11 complete) they averaged 24.45.

If the Packers aren't scoring 1.8 more points per game next year, I'm going to dig up that Bishop thread again, just to taunt you. :taunt:

[get louder at lambeau]

If you watch the clip, the safety is turned inside and looking toward the middle of the field. There's little doubt that he was watching for someone other than Jennings down the middle first. His first responsibility was not to Jennings..or he blew his responsibility.

Typically in cover 2 that guy's responsibility is whichever receiver gets deepest on his side of the field. That would be Jennings in this case. Nate Allen is not even close to being the first, or the best, deep safety that Greg Jennings has run by for a TD.

I would think that he's turned inside because 4 of the 5 eligible receivers are on the opposite side of the field. They want to get the D to overplay that side, obviously. That's why they put everyone else on one side and throw to the only guy on the other side.

You can't set it up as EITHER Jennings wasn't his guy OR he blew his responsibility. He DID blow his responsibility, either way. It's not like he was anywhere near any other receiver. If Finley or anyone else was his responsibility, they would have to at least be within 15 yards of him for him to have not blown that responsibility, right? So if his responsibility was something other than normal deep cover 2, he blew his responsibility even worse. When he comes back into the screen, he is deeper than Jennings, as he should be, but only by about half a yard, and he doesn't have the angle to catch him. He is a full 15 yards away from any other Packer.

[sharpe1027]

Typically in cover 2 that guy's responsibility is whichever receiver gets deepest on his side of the field. That would be Jennings in this case. Nate Allen is not even close to being the first, or the best, deep safety that Greg Jennings has run by for a TD.

I would think that he's turned inside because 4 of the 5 eligible receivers are on the opposite side of the field. They want to get the D to overplay that side, obviously. That's why they put everyone else on one side and throw to the only guy on the other side.

You can't set it up as EITHER Jennings wasn't his guy OR he blew his responsibility. He DID blow his responsibility, either way. It's not like he was anywhere near any other receiver. If Finley or anyone else was his responsibility, they would have to at least be within 15 yards of him for him to have not blown that responsibility, right? So if his responsibility was something other than normal deep cover 2, he blew his responsibility even worse. When he comes back into the screen, he is deeper than Jennings, as he should be, but only by about half a yard, and he doesn't have the angle to catch him. He is a full 15 yards away from any other Packer.

How about I set it up like this: the safety was more concerned about someone other than Jennings at the snap of the ball. He turned inside and made several steps toward the middle. If he was flat out doubling Jennings, that would never have happened. As PB said, it looked like cover 2. Either way, the way it looks to me, he was concerned about somebody in the middle of the field. Its not too much of a stretch to think that Finley was part of that concern. Who else would he have been worried about enough to pay attention to instead of/before Jennings?

[mraynrand]

Now this thread is getting into the territory I like. Where is Bobble so I can argue with him about how much the Safety's head was turned toward Jennings or Finley?

[get louder at lambeau]

How about I set it up like this: the safety was more concerned about someone other than Jennings at the snap of the ball. He turned inside and made several steps toward the middle. If he was flat out doubling Jennings, that would never have happened. As PB said, it looked like cover 2. Either way, the way it looks to me, he was concerned about somebody in the middle of the field. Its not too much of a stretch to think that Finley was part of that concern. Who else would he have been worried about enough to pay attention to instead of/before Jennings?

The offensive sets are designed to confuse those guys into taking an extra step or two and then taking advantage of them. At the snap of the ball, 4 eligible guys were to the other side, with only one on his side. Of course he's gonna be concerned about crossing routes and whatnot developing underneath him. He also needed to be turned that way to be able to see where the QB was looking. That doesn't change the basic responsibility of staying deeper than the deepest, which was Jennings. That's the only guy who got into his zone, and he and the CB both underestimated Jennings' speed. McCarthy was trying to set him up, and it worked.

[pbmax]

Now this thread is getting into the territory I like. Where is Bobble so I can argue with him about how much the Safety's head was turned toward Jennings or Finley?

If you can whittle the HD video down to something below 1 Terabyte, perhaps we can see for ourselves.

[mraynrand]

If you can whittle the HD video down to something below 1 Terabyte, perhaps we can see for ourselves.

I eventually got that figured out, but not before destroying/deleting several games.... :oops:

[Deputy Nutz]

fucking ridiculous.

[mraynrand]

fucking ridiculous.

I agree. I'd rather reproduce by fission.

[sharpe1027]

The offensive sets are designed to confuse those guys into taking an extra step or two and then taking advantage of them. At the snap of the ball, 4 eligible guys were to the other side, with only one on his side. Of course he's gonna be concerned about crossing routes and whatnot developing underneath him. He also needed to be turned that way to be able to see where the QB was looking. That doesn't change the basic responsibility of staying deeper than the deepest, which was Jennings. That's the only guy who got into his zone, and he and the CB both underestimated Jennings' speed. McCarthy was trying to set him up, and it worked.

I guess you can see what you want from the video, and we are boring other posters by discussing actual football plays, formations and coverages. Regardless, there are comments by players, sports writers and coaches that say that Philly consistently doubled and even tripled Finley.

[mraynrand]

I guess you can see what you want from the video, and we are boring other posters by discussing actual football plays, formations and coverages. Regardless, there are comments by players, sports writers and coaches that say that Philly consistently doubled and even tripled Finley.

Why should you care about other posters? Get in there and fight, gaddamit!

[sharpe1027]

Why should you care about other posters? Get in there and fight, gaddamit!

Why should you care about what I care about?

[mraynrand]

Why should you care about what I care about?

Why should you care why I care what you care about?

[MJZiggy]

Why should you care why I care what you care about?

I saw your cousin the other day a few blocks from my house. Cute kid.

[sharpe1027]

Why should you care why I care what you care about?

Are you implying that I should I care that I cared that you cared about what I cared about?

[mraynrand]

I saw your cousin the other day a few blocks from my house. Cute kid. :taunt:

[MJZiggy]

:taunt:

If he poops on my lawn, I'm still sicking the shepherd on him.