Packers 2021 draft class

[wist43]

Can't believe none of you nimrods started a thread on the draft class as a whole?? Too busy with the latest drama I guess ;)

-----------------------------------------

Green Bay Packers 2021 NFL Draft Picks:

Round 1: No. 29 – Eric Stokes, CB, Georgia
Round 2: No. 62 – Josh Myers, C, Ohio State
Round 3: No. 85 – Amari Rodgers, WR, Clemson
Round 4: No. 142 (Compensatory) – Royce Newman, OG, Ole Miss
Round 5: No. 173 – Tedarrell Slaton, DT, Florida
Round 5: No. 178 (Compensatory) – Shemar Jean-Charles, CB, Appalachian State
Round 6: No. 214 – Cole Van Lanen, OT, Wisconsin
Round 6: No. 220 (Compensatory) – Isaiah McDuffie, LB, Boston College
Round 7: No. 256 – Kylin Hill, RB, Mississippi State

-------------------------------------

As for the picks themselves, I'm reasonably familiar with Stokes, Myers, Rodgers, and Slaton. I looked at those guys before the draft.

Still have to review the rest, but my initial impression is the two CB picks seem shaky. I looked at Jean-charles tape and came away, meh :huh:

As I said in another thread, Stokes' footwork and change of direction are concerning. Good route runners are going to send him spinning. He's going to need to study a lot of film and get some serious coaching.

Liked what I saw of Hill.

Have a lot of tape to watch to get up to speed on these guys.

[wist43]

Newman's tape looks pretty good.

Slaton's problem is conditioning.

[Fritz]

Newman's tape looks pretty good.

Slaton's problem is conditioning.

He sure seems to have a lot of promise, but of course there's a reason he fell to the fifth round.

If - a big if - he can get serious about conditioning and viewing this as his profession, he could be very, very good.

I find it interesting too that Gutekunst did not take a flyer later in the draft on athletic guys who maybe, just maybe, could figure it out. Looks like most of the late-round guys are fitted for special teams duty period. Maybe the Packers are tired of having a bottom-five special teams unit nearly every year. I mean,I know most late-round guys end up as special teamers, but I think sometimes Ted took flyers on really good athletes, in hopes of finding a diamond in the rough. Not that it works out too often.

The one pick that really mystifies me is that fifth-round corner they took, Shemale Jean-Claude Van Damme. Small, not particularly athletic. I wonder what they saw.

[bobblehead]

I think Kylin Hill was a steal in the 7th. He is well rounded and pretty solid. RB is set for a couple years until Jones is opted out.

[Fritz]

He did seem like a pretty good, solid pick from the bits I read.

[Sparkey]

The Jean-Charles pick seems like an anti-measurables pick. Maybe that's a good thing. The pack have had all these backups with exceptional measurables, but they always seem to make mental mistakes in coverage. This pick is just the opposite. Average measurables but, by all accounts, incredible awareness and football IQ. He also seems eager on special teams. As a depth piece, I'll take assignment sure every time. Hopefully he can translate his positives on the field at the next level.

[Fritz]

If Newsome plays early on and gets hammered, I want to hear an announcer say "I can't believe it - that defender just rolls Royce!"

[texaspackerbacker]

If we had gotten nobody decent beyond Stokes in the first round, I'd be moderately satisfied, as we got what seems to be an excellent player at exactly the position I wanted. The rest of the draft, however, seems pretty solid too, though. Myer is bigger and faster than Linsley and supposedly very smart. I wouldn't be surprised also with his size if he gets a try at tackle and can play there too. With him and Newman and Van Laanen, the O Line should be set up pretty good. I heard that the staff was thrilled about Jean-Charles falling to them. There were a couple other Corners I was hoping for at that point, but I'll defer to the experts and hope for the best. I started out negative about Rodgers - the new WR - but from what I read, he too seems to be a keeper. So conditioning is Slaton's flaw? I'll take him anyway. Maybe we got the next Gilbert Brown hahahaha.

[Sparkey]

If Newsome plays early on and gets hammered, I want to hear an announcer say "I can't believe it - that defender just rolls Royce!"
That would be priceless. Lol

[Packgator]

SEC...........4
Big 10........2
ACC...........2
Other.........1

[run pMc]

They've drafted a lot of OL tweeners: Hansen, Stepaniak, Runyan, Myers, Newman, Van Lanen... that's a lot of OL additions. They should have plenty of OL depth on the PS lol.
I think Myers gets first crack at starting C, else he's C/G depth and they probably go with Patrick or Jenkins. Myers is NOT a tackle; he has tackle size but he lacks length and is better inside.
I think they try Newman at RT and kick him in to G to compete with Stepaniak. Not sure if they've tried Stepaniak at C, he seems like a G and that's it.

Van Lanen I'm not sure what they do with. Probably same idea as Newman -- he tested suprisingly well and is could probably get you out of a game at RT but I get the feeling his best pro position is at guard. Wouldn't bet against a Badger though.

[run pMc]

Stokes is a high upside pick with some raw that needs coaching, and I'm ok with that. He seems pretty coachable and showed year-over-year growth as a CB. He's grabby but he's a better athlete than Josh Jackson, so he's likely to be out there in dime situations. Improving team speed can't hurt.

They absolutely needed another CB, even if it was a UDFA. The scouts all say Jean-Charles isn't a great athlete and from what little youtube I saw of him, he will struggle against a burner but he's good at contesting the catch and seems to have some instincts. I think they will ease him along but try him in the slot first. He's enthusiastic about special teams and that's his pathway to snaps initially anyway.

[run pMc]

Kylin Hill seems like a bit of a high strung guy but IIRC he led the SEC in rushing one year -- which is no small feat -- and has a power component to his game. He can catch and is willing to pass pro, so I can see shades of Jamaal Williams to him.

I liked Khalil Herbert a little better but Hill is a pretty good get especially in the 7th round. He's better than Devante Mays or Deshawn Wynn was coming out of CFB, that's for sure. He should beat Dexter Williams for a spot, either on the 53 or the PS. I'd give all those fringe RB guys (Hill, DexterW., P.Taylor, M.Weber) a ton of snaps in preseason to separate the wheat from the chaff.

I was expecting them to get a little scat burner back like a Javian Hawkins, I'm guessing Amari Rodgers is going to do some of that.

[red]

I think Kylin Hill was a steal in the 7th. He is well rounded and pretty solid. RB is set for a couple years until Jones is opted out.

sounds like a good RB before a coaching change

[Harlan Huckleby]

The Jean-Charles pick seems like an anti-measurables pick. Maybe that's a good thing. The pack have had all these backups with exceptional measurables, but they always seem to make mental mistakes in coverage. This pick is just the opposite. Average measurables but, by all accounts, incredible awareness and football IQ. He also seems eager on special teams. As a depth piece, I'll take assignment sure every time. Hopefully he can translate his positives on the field at the next level.
What is a 178 pound guy going to do in pros on special teams? He'll get bullied if they try and use him as a gunner. He'll break in two returning punts.

I'm calling that pip squeak "Rudy"

[HarveyWallbangers]

I didn't like the Myers pick in round 2 or the small, slow, small college CB in round 5. I liked the rest of the draft.

[wist43]

I think the 3 shakiest picks are,

Stokes
Slaton
Jean-Charles

Stokes has short area burst issues, Slaton is more likely to eat himself out of the league than succeed, and Jean-Charles has limited speed and measurables.

Everyone else I like.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think the 3 shakiest picks are,

Stokes
Slaton
Jean-Charles

Stokes has short area burst issues, Slaton is more likely to eat himself out of the league than succeed, and Jean-Charles has limited speed and measurables.

Everyone else I like.

What's the reasoning behind this? I read a bio on NFL.com saying something about his weight, but that goes against other things that I've read about him. Perhaps it was because he was listed at 360 at Florida. However, he didn't play at that weight. Draft Network said before his testing that he didn't look 360--more likely 330. Sure enough, he came in at 330 at his Pro Day. Yes, he's a big dude. NTs tend to have a gut (see Snacks Harrison), but this guy isn't that out of shape, and he's supposed to be a high effort guy..

Obviously, almost all NTs have the possibility of eating themselves out of the league (Gilbert Brown toed the line his whole career), but why worry about this guy more than other 3-4 NTs? The reports I read about him actually had me bump him up in my ratings higher than a typical 3-4 NT for three reasons: effort guy, has matured and kept his weight in check later in his college career, and could provide at least a little bit as a pass rusher.

[Joemailman]

What's the reasoning behind this? I read a bio on NFL.com saying something about his weight, but that goes against other things that I've read about him. Perhaps it was because he was listed at 360 at Florida. However, he didn't play at that weight. Draft Network said before his testing that he didn't look 360--more likely 330. Sure enough, he came in at 330 at his Pro Day. Yes, he's a big dude. NTs tend to have a gut (see Snacks Harrison), but this guy isn't that out of shape, and he's supposed to be a high effort guy..

Obviously, almost all NTs have the possibility of eating themselves out of the league (Gilbert Brown toed the line his whole career), but why worry about this guy more than other 3-4 NTs? The reports I read about him actually had me bump him up in my ratings higher than a typical 3-4 NT for three reasons: effort guy, has matured and kept his weight in check later in his college career, and could provide at least a little bit as a pass rusher.

I've read on some sites that he had weight fluctuations on college. PFN claims that he dropped 30 pounds since the end of his senior season.

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/tedarrell-slaton-nfl-draft-player-profile-florida-defensive-tackle/

Analysis: Slaton displayed the ability to clog the middle of the field and push the pocket at the college level, but he must round into a complete defensive lineman if he’s to play on Sundays. He’s dropped almost 30 pounds since the end of his senior season and is headed in the right direction. Slaton’s size and power will get consideration from two-gap defenses, and at the very least, he’s worth stashing on a practice squad next fall.

Not sure who is right on this subject. He could be a considerable upgrade over Lancaster though if he can keep his weight around 330.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Draft Network had this:


Tedarrell Slaton is an impressively built interior defensive line prospect. He's listed at nearly 360 pounds, but looks much slimmer than his listed weight—he looks around 330 pounds and carries his weight well with an evenly distributed body structure.

[Zool]

What's the reasoning behind this?

Negativity makes some feel superior.

[call_me_ishmael]

I'm optimistic. I really like the Gooter quote about TT wanting Clay Matthews and saying pay as little as possible but ensure it happens and him relating that to the receiver they took. It would be amazingggg if it worked out as well!

I really like the emphasis on the OL. Would have liked to see a premier athletic tackle taken high but oh well, thems the breaks.

[wist43]

The reason Slaton's weight gets brought up is b/c of the problems he's had with conditioning.

All of those big guys need a blow and need to be part of a rotation, but Slaton had to be removed from games at times b/c he wore down.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The reason Slaton's weight gets brought up is b/c of the problems he's had with conditioning.

All of those big guys need a blow and need to be part of a rotation, but Slaton had to be removed from games at times b/c he wore down.

There were two other big, traditional, run stuffing 3-4 NTs drafted this year, Tyler Shelvin (4th round) and Quinton Bohanna (6th round). Here are their scouting reports:

Shelvin:


Conditioning has been an issue

Bohanna:


Any team who invests in Bohanna will need to hope that he’s able to maintain his reduced size after he showed up at his Pro Day approximately 30 pounds lighter than his listed weight (357 lbs) on the Kentucky roster.

Being 340+ pounds is not natural. It's pretty much a concern with any of those guys. I'm encouraged to read that he seems like he gives good effort and that he maintained his weight this year. I suspect it will always be a concern--just like it was with the Gravedigger--but I have hopes for the guy. If he wants it, he has a role. We'll see.

[King Friday]

The next time that I hear the phrase "that 340 lb nose tackle is ready to run a marathon tomorrow" will be my first.

[run pMc]

I'm not worried about it. It's normal for guys that big and he seems to have worked at it. My guess is the coaches will keep at him and he'll toe the line. Honestly, he probably won't see a ton of snaps per game anyway.
One thing I did notice is he seemed to stay on his feet, so that should be an upgrade over Lancaster.

[bobblehead]

I've read on some sites that he had weight fluctuations on college. PFN claims that he dropped 30 pounds since the end of his senior season.

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/tedarrell-slaton-nfl-draft-player-profile-florida-defensive-tackle/


Not sure who is right on this subject. He could be a considerable upgrade over Lancaster though if he can keep his weight around 330.

Rashod Bateman shed 2" of height before his proday. Just sayin' don't believe everything you read on the college program.

[wist43]

There were two other big, traditional, run stuffing 3-4 NTs drafted this year, Tyler Shelvin (4th round) and Quinton Bohanna (6th round). Here are their scouting reports:

Shelvin:



Bohanna:



Being 340+ pounds is not natural. It's pretty much a concern with any of those guys. I'm encouraged to read that he seems like he gives good effort and that he maintained his weight this year. I suspect it will always be a concern--just like it was with the Gravedigger--but I have hopes for the guy. If he wants it, he has a role. We'll see.

The interior guy I wanted in those later rounds was Jonathan Marshall. He went in the 6th.

[RashanGary]

DL you have to keep taking stabs. You never know a guys work ethic or body potential until they’re in their mid 20s, sometimes 25 years old. So you throw darts every year and keep the ones that stick.

Keke looks to be progressing well. He’s probably gonna be better in 2021 than any DL from the 2021 class. It’s a position that takes a little time and is impossible to predict.

They threw a dart. They should throw one every year at that DL board.

[sharpe1027]

I think DL has high (unrealistic?) expectations for what constitutes a solid stater such that everyone's always looking for something better. Similar thing could be said for QB.

[RashanGary]

I think DL has high (unrealistic?) expectations for what constitutes a solid stater such that everyone's always looking for something better. Similar thing could be said for QB.

I think DT is the single best example of a position where there aren’t enough good ones to go around. There are maybe 10 truly good DTs at a given time in the NFL. You even go down the probowl list and back end of the pro bowlers are just OK.

Tight end is another one. Tonyan probably should have been a pro bowler. He’s good but was hardly a special player. This year i do think he has a chance to be special tho. Just last year, him developing, he was already better than most and he wasn’t even developed yet.

Receivers, there are like 30 good ones. DT and TE, you can count on two hands the really good ones. It’s crazy how few big guys exist in the world let alone ones that are truly capable of playing ball.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The interior guy I wanted in those later rounds was Jonathan Marshall. He went in the 6th.

Not the same type of player. Marshall is only 310 lbs. If we drafted him, you'd probably say he doesn't have enough "sand in the pants".

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think DT is the single best example of a position where there aren’t enough good ones to go around. There are maybe 10 truly good DTs at a given time in the NFL. You even go down the probowl list and back end of the pro bowlers are just OK.

Tight end is another one. Tonyan probably should have been a pro bowler. He’s good but was hardly a special player. This year i do think he has a chance to be special tho. Just last year, him developing, he was already better than most and he wasn’t even developed yet.

Receivers, there are like 30 good ones. DT and TE, you can count on two hands the really good ones. It’s crazy how few big guys exist in the world let alone ones that are truly capable of playing ball.

True. 10 might be high (Clark, Cox, Jones, Donald, Heyward, Buckner, Jarrett). Atkins used to be in that group. Not sure how he played last year. The rest fill specific roles.

[sharpe1027]

I think DT is the single best example of a position where there aren’t enough good ones to go around. There are maybe 10 truly good DTs at a given time in the NFL. You even go down the probowl list and back end of the pro bowlers are just OK.

Tight end is another one. Tonyan probably should have been a pro bowler. He’s good but was hardly a special player. This year i do think he has a chance to be special tho. Just last year, him developing, he was already better than most and he wasn’t even developed yet.

Receivers, there are like 30 good ones. DT and TE, you can count on two hands the really good ones. It’s crazy how few big guys exist in the world let alone ones that are truly capable of playing ball.

What that tells me is there is a skewed subjective view of what it means to be good based on the position. If it were an objective measure, the percentages would necessarily be the same.

[RashanGary]

What that tells me is there is a skewed subjective view of what it means to be good based on the position. If it were an objective measure, the percentages would necessarily be the same.

Yeah, If scaled in the sense of there being 64 good interior lineman and you just adjust your expectations to what is real, yeah, people have a skewed view of what a good lineman is.

I think it’s more that there aren’t nearly enough good interior d lineman in the league.

[RashanGary]

The reality of how bad DL play is in the league....


Clark is a top 6 DT and a pro bowler
Keke is in the top 64 for sure (meaning he’s a starter of there are two per team)
Lowry is in the top 128 (meaning he’s easily a rotational talent)
Lancaster is in the top 128 (same)

So the packers have a star, a starter and two rotational guys. Meaning they’re about average compared to the rest of the league.


But since we all know what dominant football looks like, we know that we’re a far cry from being dominant and NEED dL talent even if we are in the average spectrum of DL talent compared to the league.

[Fritz]

I've read on some sites that he had weight fluctuations on college. PFN claims that he dropped 30 pounds since the end of his senior season.

https://www.profootballnetwork.com/tedarrell-slaton-nfl-draft-player-profile-florida-defensive-tackle/


Not sure who is right on this subject. He could be a considerable upgrade over Lancaster though if he can keep his weight around 330.


I predict Slaton is going to be a star - the next Gilbert Brown.

[texaspackerbacker]

I agree, Fritz (since I basically said the same thing a couple days ago hahahaha).

I'm not so sure the losing 30 pounds and alleged earlier weight fluctuations are a good thing, though. I'd love to have another Gilbert Brown, but we don't need no stinking Oprah.

RG, do you really think Lowry and Lancaster are good enough to be "rotational players" on most NFL teams? I'm not so sure, just as I'm not so sure Keke is starter quality on most teams. I think there's a strong chance Slaton will quickly be recognized as a better player than any of those three.

[RashanGary]

I agree, Fritz (since I basically said the same thing a couple days ago hahahaha).

I'm not so sure the losing 30 pounds and alleged earlier weight fluctuations are a good thing, though. I'd love to have another Gilbert Brown, but we don't need no stinking Oprah.

RG, do you really think Lowry and Lancaster are good enough to be "rotational players" on most NFL teams? I'm not so sure, just as I'm not so sure Keke is starter quality on most teams. I think there's a strong chance Slaton will quickly be recognized as a better player than any of those three.

Not to be trite, but I watch over 100 games a season due to my gambling aspirations. I think I have a better idea about what the trenches look like across the league than most.

[texaspackerbacker]

ok, sir, I yield to your expertise hahahahaha.

[RashanGary]

True. 10 might be high (Clark, Cox, Jones, Donald, Heyward, Buckner, Jarrett). Atkins used to be in that group. Not sure how he played last year. The rest fill specific roles.

Dalvin Tomlinson, even Leonard Williams, Vita Vea, Suh, etc.... there’s a few. But it’s a very small few. I see DT and TE as the hardest to fill positions in football with the fewest star players.

[sharpe1027]

Yeah, If scaled in the sense of there being 64 good interior lineman and you just adjust your expectations to what is real, yeah, people have a skewed view of what a good lineman is.

I think it’s more that there aren’t nearly enough good interior d lineman in the league.

What I hear you saying is that an average DL isn't good enough, but an average WR is good enough. To me, that means your definition of good enough is not consistent from position to position. Maybe what's behind your view is that having a top DL is more important than having a top WR to the team. That the drop off in benefit to the team from a top player to an average player is greater for DL than for WR?

[RashanGary]

What I hear you saying is that an average DL isn't good enough, but an average WR is good enough. To me, that means your definition of good enough is not consistent from position to position. Maybe what's behind your view is that having a top DL is more important than having a top WR to the team. That the drop off in benefit to the team from a top player to an average player is greater for DL than for WR?

It’s literally that the average receiver is good and the average DL is bad. There are more good receivers and less quality DL. Why do they have to be equal?

[Joemailman]

Zach Kruse Retweeted
TJ Lang
@TJLang70
·
1h
Packers definitely got some nice young pieces added on the OL.. Royce Newman is a good looking prospect. Probably needs a year or 2 to develop some more strength but plays with great quickness and has a strong base. Rarely puts himself in a bad position. Probably a future OG..

[run pMc]

It’s literally that the average receiver is good and the average DL is bad. There are more good receivers and less quality DL. Why do they have to be equal?

RG's right -- there are more good WR's than DL's. It's why DL's get overdrafted.

[Bretsky]

REAL QUESTION

WHO in here would have picked Stokes over Christian Barmore ? or did we just go Need ? Need is what I thought we did round 2 for sure over BPA

[Joemailman]

REAL QUESTION

WHO in here would have picked Stokes over Christian Barmore ? or did we just go Need ? Need is what I thought we did round 2 for sure over BPA

I figured them both as early 2nd round guys. I think they probably saw Stokes as a guy with more upside. Myers might have been BPA. He went about where he was expected to go. They may have wanted to Go OL there and Myers was higher on their board than any OT's at that point.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I have no problem with Stokes over Barmore. Pretty comparable prospects. Barmore went #38, so he obviously wasn’t as highly rated by teams as thought.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I figured them both as early 2nd round guys. I think they probably saw Stokes as a guy with more upside. Myers might have been BPA. He went about where he was expected to go. They may have wanted to Go OL there and Myers was higher on their board than any OT's at that point.

I wish there wasn’t as big of a run on OTs as there was (I was hoping Radunz would fall a bit more), but Jenkins gave the Packers flexibility to take OT or interior OL there.

[Bretsky]

I wish there wasn’t as big of a run on OTs as there was (I was hoping Radunz would fall a bit more), but Jenkins gave the Packers flexibility to take OT or interior OL there.


ya; I might be jaded

Three of the guys I would have loved to see with our round 2 pick were snapped up in 3 of the four picks ahead of us

[sharpe1027]

It’s literally that the average receiver is good and the average DL is bad. There are more good receivers and less quality DL. Why do they have to be equal?

Because your categorization of a bad DL is subjective and I don't understand how you get there. If a player is better than half the other starters at their position, I'd argue that makes them good by any objective way of assessing them.

It's semantics, but I think it's important because it gets to the reason why they put more value in drafting DL. Sorry if this is too far down the rabbit hole.

[smuggler]

I do feel like some of the timing was hard on Green Bay. The Ravens taking the Minnesota WR a few spots before us in Round 1 felt a little like Justin Jefferson last year, though I am not saying Bateman will be nearly as effective as JJ was a a rook. Then, Basham went right before us in the next round and I had a feeling Green Bay would be interested in him, but not nearly as strong as I felt about Bateman.

What JH is saying is that, unlike a receiver, most DL do not have that big of an impact on the game. I agree that you only judge a player against his peers, so the "average" receiver does have more of an impact on a game than the "average" lineman, but essentially the two of you are just arguing semantics and really concepts do not matter. Wins matter.

[Bretsky]

I was listening to Wilde and Tausch today and have been a lot lately

Apparently there were two WR's GB was really trying to trade up for last year. One was Justin Jefferson. I think Aiyuk was the other but they didn't say today.

Wilde also outlined several things that AROD really wasn't fond of over the last couple years. The Kumerow cut was one of them; he also noted several of the GB Packers coaches were really unhappy WhitewaterJ got cut. Perception was he was better than some of the Gooters draftjags. What a mess

[Freak Out]

So they fire Gutebag if that brings Arod back until he retires. Then what? Who takes over and basically nobody will feel safe until he leaves? lol

[Sparkey]

If he was better, and I don't know either way, but the fact he is still bouncing around on futures contracts at the age of 29 suggests that he was/is Just A Guy as well...

J

[call_me_ishmael]

[QUOTE=HarveyWallbangers;1091424]I wish there wasn’t as big of a run on OTs as there was (I was hoping Radunz would fall a bit more), but Jenkins gave the Packers flexibility to take OT or interior OL there.[What/QUOTE]

What is your view on the center? Physically he seemed unusually tall for a center to my untrained and uninformed eye. Hopefully he is a stud.

[call_me_ishmael]

I do feel like some of the timing was hard on Green Bay. The Ravens taking the Minnesota WR a few spots before us in Round 1 felt a little like Justin Jefferson last year, though I am not saying Bateman will be nearly as effective as JJ was a a rook. Then, Basham went right before us in the next round and I had a feeling Green Bay would be interested in him, but not nearly as strong as I felt about Bateman.

What JH is saying is that, unlike a receiver, most DL do not have that big of an impact on the game. I agree that you only judge a player against his peers, so the "average" receiver does have more of an impact on a game than the "average" lineman, but essentially the two of you are just arguing semantics and really concepts do not matter. Wins matter.

I pretty much agree with this. I am totally good with the CB though. Dude only has to be a CB 2. I think/hope he can be that.

[sharpe1027]

I do feel like some of the timing was hard on Green Bay. The Ravens taking the Minnesota WR a few spots before us in Round 1 felt a little like Justin Jefferson last year, though I am not saying Bateman will be nearly as effective as JJ was a a rook. Then, Basham went right before us in the next round and I had a feeling Green Bay would be interested in him, but not nearly as strong as I felt about Bateman.

What JH is saying is that, unlike a receiver, most DL do not have that big of an impact on the game. I agree that you only judge a player against his peers, so the "average" receiver does have more of an impact on a game than the "average" lineman, but essentially the two of you are just arguing semantics and really concepts do not matter. Wins matter.

Trying to tease out why DL get drafted so much/high if most of them don't contribute as much as WRs. Could it be the difference between the top couple DL and the average DL means more to winning than the difference between the top WRs and an average WR?

[smuggler]

I believe statistically you're better served by having a top-10 WR on your roster than a top-10 DL. BUT, you still need capable players at all positions. And you have to consider that people are flawed (including, if not especially, football decision makers), the draft is (to a large part) about any player's future and not so much their present, and GMs don't have all the information to make the correct decision in the first place.

[sharpe1027]

I believe statistically you're better served by having a top-10 WR on your roster than a top-10 DL. BUT, you still need capable players at all positions. And you have to consider that people are flawed (including, if not especially, football decision makers), the draft is (to a large part) about any player's future and not so much their present, and GMs don't have all the information to make the correct decision in the first place.

So, they draft more DL than they should because they are flawed and don't have enough information? I guess it's possible.

The scenario I posed, though isn't just top ten versus too ten at each position. It's the potential improvement over the existing roster. If you already have two top ten at a position, getting a third is less important to winning than if you have the worst two starters in the league. Thus, my thought that maybe GMs see more to gain in upgrading from an average DL than at some other positions.

[hoosier]

Good DL are so much harder to find than good WRs. And a strong DL can really disrupt the game and make up for deficiencies in other areas of the defense. Think what the NYG did to Pats in SBs XLI and XLV. A great WR, meanwhile, will be Calvin Johnson or AJ Green if you don't provide him with a strong supporting cast.

[bobblehead]

REAL QUESTION

WHO in here would have picked Stokes over Christian Barmore ? or did we just go Need ? Need is what I thought we did round 2 for sure over BPA

I would have traded back with about 7 guys I like on the board. After reading up on Stokes and how he fared against big names I am down with the pick.

But honestly, Stokes, JOK, Barmore, Jenkins, Eichemburg, Elijah Moore, Radunz, Bolton, Marshall. I could have been pleased with any of those picks, or 2 of them after we used the trade back capital to then trade up with our own 2nd. Do you like Stokes/Myers better than JOK/Jenkins? I don't.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I would have traded back with about 7 guys I like on the board. After reading up on Stokes and how he fared against big names I am down with the pick.

But honestly, Stokes, JOK, Barmore, Jenkins, Eichemburg, Elijah Moore, Radunz, Bolton, Marshall. I could have been pleased with any of those picks, or 2 of them after we used the trade back capital to then trade up with our own 2nd. Do you like Stokes/Myers better than JOK/Jenkins? I don't.

Dmitroff, the former Falcons GM, was on a PFF podcast I watched yesterday. He said it isn't always easy to trade up or down in the draft--especially around the end of the 1st round. You have to have a dance partner.

[wist43]

REAL QUESTION

WHO in here would have picked Stokes over Christian Barmore ? or did we just go Need ? Need is what I thought we did round 2 for sure over BPA

The problem all of us have with woulda, coulda, shoulda on any defensive picks is Berry.

We simply have no idea what he's going to do or how he's going to use anybody. With Capers you knew he was going to run a static 2-4 75% of the time, so it didn't matter who the players were, we were going to get powned.

Pettine on the other hand was multiple all the time... light years better, good DC. We're going to miss him.

Berry?? We have no idea, but color me very, very skeptical.

[Fritz]

This did seem like a need draft moreso than any other Gutes has run. Needed a corner? First round. Needed a replacement center for the guy you just lost? Second round. Need a slot guy to make the offense work right? Check, third round. Need a big body in the middle on defense? Check, fifth round. Need to improve on those abysmal special teams rankings? Check, fifth, sixth, and seventh rounds.

[texaspackerbacker]

This was the way you're supposed to conduct a draft. I don't know if Gutekunst knew how bad he fucked up last year, and wanted to make up for it this year or impress Rodgers or what, but somehow, good sense was used. You don't suppose those ongoing negotiations with Rodgers resulted in some Rodgers input, do you? hahahaha

[smuggler]

I was thinking about the draft tonight and I thought it would make a pretty good group of players even if you didn't include Stokes. Hope springs eternal.

[Joemailman]

This was the way you're supposed to conduct a draft. I don't know if Gutekunst knew how bad he fucked up last year, and wanted to make up for it this year or impress Rodgers or what, but somehow, good sense was used. You don't suppose those ongoing negotiations with Rodgers resulted in some Rodgers input, do you? hahahaha

Now I'm a little nervous about this draft.

[smuggler]

Now I'm a little nervous about this draft.

I also felt this way, but didn't want to speak it into truth.

This year's draft will be more of a crapshoot than drafts usually are. And that's impressive. We will see how our beloved squad benefited or suffered due to the Covid madness.

[Joemailman]

Round 1: No. 29 – Eric Stokes, CB, Georgia
Round 2: No. 62 – Josh Myers, C, Ohio State
Round 3: No. 85 – Amari Rodgers, WR, Clemson
Round 4: No. 142 (Compensatory) – Royce Newman, OG, Ole Miss
Round 5: No. 173 – Tedarrell Slaton, DT, Florida
Round 5: No. 178 (Compensatory) – Shemar Jean-Charles, CB, Appalachian State
Round 6: No. 214 – Cole Van Lanen, OT, Wisconsin
Round 6: No. 220 (Compensatory) – Isaiah McDuffie, LB, Boston College
Round 7: No. 256 – Kylin Hill, RB, Mississippi State

Stokes will be interesting. Some have called this pick a reach to fill a need. I see this as Gute going after a guy he feels has a ton of upside. Probably no CB in college faced more of the top WR's in the last 2 years. He's tested.

Myers, Rodgers and Newman are all really solid, low floor picks.They've played against top competition. This can be a great draft if these guys are more than JAGs.

The 2 5th round picks are kind of opposites. Slaton is a physical specimen who needs to show he can make plays. SJC is a real player who needs to show he's enough of an athlete to excel in the NFL.

Don't have a sense yet about McDuffie. Hopefully he's an upgrade over Burks and/or Summers.

Hill has a chance to be a steal. Opting out after the season started probably hurt his draft status. Based on his 2019 season, he probably should have been drafted in the 4-5 rounds.

[call_me_ishmael]

I think for me the biggest take away from the draft is the Packers are thinking Jenkins is the RT of the future. That's my hot take of the year, but it's hard not to think that when they acquired three inside linemen.

[smuggler]

Yes, they have a lot of bodies that can compete, participate, and potentially (especially in the case of Junior Runyan) excel in the interior. They need that on the outside, which is why they needed to extend Bakhtiari.

[texaspackerbacker]

Now I'm a little nervous about this draft.

I suppose you'd prefer a debacle like last year's draft?

[texaspackerbacker]

Stokes will be interesting. Some have called this pick a reach to fill a need. I see this as Gute going after a guy he feels has a ton of upside. Probably no CB in college faced more of the top WR's in the last 2 years. He's tested.

Myers, Rodgers and Newman are all really solid, low floor picks.They've played against top competition. This can be a great draft if these guys are more than JAGs.

The 2 5th round picks are kind of opposites. Slaton is a physical specimen who needs to show he can make plays. SJC is a real player who needs to show he's enough of an athlete to excel in the NFL.

Don't have a sense yet about McDuffie. Hopefully he's an upgrade over Burks and/or Summers.

Hill has a chance to be a steal. Opting out after the season started probably hurt his draft status. Based on his 2019 season, he probably should have been drafted in the 4-5 rounds.

Stokes, and throw in Myers and maybe Newman too were undoubtedly a product of somebody telling Gutekunst (or maybe even his telling himself) "you damn well better not fuck up again and totally ignore the needs of the team".

Amari Rodgers was likely a result of Gutekunst either giving into or buying into himself the "need" some perceive to draft a WR. At least he had the good sense to draft the type we did need - a returner/slot type.

Slaton was likely a matter of finally waking up to the idea that we needed somebody with some size and strength beside Clark - a reaction to a few years of Lowery and Lancaster.

Jean-Charles probably is a product of the idea, "you can never have too many good Corners". He was a good choice it seems in the sense that he's something we sort of need, a slot Corner as well as somebody their stff saw as a bargain at that point. I had been hoping for one of several others, but I'm now content with Jean-Charles

McDuffie is a late concession to those who thought we needed an ILB. He sounds decent, but 6th round you never know.

Hill was a high rated HS recruit who sounds a lot like Jamal Williams. If not, we have 3 or 4 other candidates for that roster spot.

As I have said, there's absolutely nothing wrong with drafting what you need - it's the good and normal way to conduct a draft. Either Gutekunst suddenly woke up, or somebody gave him a good talking to.

[wist43]

I'm fine with a CB in rd1, I just would have preferred Campbell, but with Jenkins still there, and JOK... I would have gone with one of them.

I'm fine with an interior lineman in rd 2, except i would have preferred Creed.

Like the Rodgers pick, like the Newman, Hill, and Mcduffie picks as well.

Slaton is worth a flyer.

[wist43]

I'm fine with a CB in rd1, I just would have preferred Campbell, but with Jenkins still there, and JOK... I would have gone with one of them.

I'm fine with an interior lineman in rd 2, except i would have preferred Creed.

Like the Rodgers pick, like the Newman, Hill, and Mcduffie picks as well.

Slaton is worth a flyer.

Changed my mind on McDuffie... watched more tape - think he's going to have a hard time sticking. Plays small, takes bad angles, poor technique in his coverage responsibilities.

Watched more tape of Newman too... he's got a chance to be a good player. Has a habit of getting his hands outside too much, but that can be coached up, and he's got the tools to develop.

[wist43]

Looked a little more at Myers...

Seems very limited - can't believe they took him over Humphrey. Watched Humphrey in the the Cotton Bowl vs. Florida, he handled Slaton easily.

The Packers scouts seem to have connections to certain universities, i.e. our scouts are best buds with their coaches kind of thing, and I think that clouds their judgement on players. At least it seems something like that is going on.

There's no rational explanation as to why they would take Myers over Humphrey, except some extraneous bias.

And the McDuffie pick?? I liked his movement skills initially, but digging deeper into the tape - I think he's undraftable. It's known we have a connection to Boston College.

Gute should undertake a review of the scouting Dept.

[texaspackerbacker]

Myers is bigger and stronger than Creed Humphrey and is supposedly exceptionally smart. Both played with a lot of good O Linemen around them, but Humphrey even more so than Myers. I think over time Myers will prove to be the better of the two.

I don't disagree with you, wist, about McDuffie, but that far down, you mostly just pick and hope.

[wist43]

Myers is bigger and stronger than Creed Humphrey and is supposedly exceptionally smart. Both played with a lot of good O Linemen around them, but Humphrey even more so than Myers. I think over time Myers will prove to be the better of the two.

I don't disagree with you, wist, about McDuffie, but that far down, you mostly just pick and hope.

Humphrey has better tape - much better tape. The only people who think otherwise reside at 1265. Who can say why they passed on one guy over another?? We'll never know, b/c they will never tell the truth.

As for McDuffie, everyone likes to make "comps"... McDuffie's NFL comp is Oren Burks. He's not as bad as Burks - nobody is as bad as Burks - but McDuffie's tape is pretty bad. 7th round flyer, sure... but there were a lot of good players still there.

The 3 best picks of this draft are shaping up to be,

Rodgers, Newman, and Hill.

[Joemailman]

Humphrey has better tape - much better tape. The only people who think otherwise reside at 1265. Who can say why they passed on one guy over another?? We'll never know, b/c they will never tell the truth.

As for McDuffie, everyone likes to make "comps"... McDuffie's NFL comp is Oren Burks. He's not as bad as Burks - nobody is as bad as Burks - but McDuffie's tape is pretty bad. 7th round flyer, sure... but there were a lot of good players still there.

The 3 best picks of this draft are shaping up to be,

Rodgers, Newman, and Hill.

I'll give Gute the benefit of the doubt on drafting O-linemen. No major misses yet. In defense of Myers, I don't know what tape you saw of him. I do know he played through a turf toe injury this year which almost nobody does. So you might not have seen him at 100%. Corey Linsley was supposedly very limited athletically, and turned out to be the best C in the NFL. So maybe there's a reason the Packers like those Ohio St. guys.

I'm not excited about McDuffie. Word on him is he makes quick decisions, but often the wrong ones. But hey, if he makes the team he'll probably be replacing Burks, so it's not all bad.

[texaspackerbacker]

Honestly, I was thinking McDuffie was similar Burks too. I just don't have quite as negative opinion of Burks, though, as some people - just raw and not instinctive enough.

[Joemailman]

Honestly, I was thinking McDuffie was similar Burks too. I just don't have quite as negative opinion of Burks, though, as some people - just raw and not instinctive enough.

A linebacker without instincts is a bad linebacker.

[texaspackerbacker]

Yeah, but it ought to be something he can acquire or grow into over time. Don't get me wrong, though. I do like Barnes and Martin better.

[wist43]

Yeah, but it ought to be something he can acquire or grow into over time. Don't get me wrong, though. I do like Barnes and Martin better.

That's what everyone said about Burks...

I knew Burks was a lost cause from the get-go b/c he simply couldn't see the play developing - at all!! All the speed and athletic ability in the world is useless if you haven't a clue which way to go.

McDuffie wasn't as bad as Burks, but he was still pretty bad. If they keep him and cut Burks, I get it, but it's most likely a lateral move.

[texaspackerbacker]

I thought and said from the start that Burks seems more like a OLB than a ILB. In that position, you need to be more proactive than reactive, so the instincts weakness shouldn't hurt as much, and the athleticism you help more.

Ideally, they keep both and cut Lowery and/or Lancaster. Clark, Slaton, Keke, and Rush and maybe one more should suffice.

[wist43]

I thought and said from the start that Burks seems more like a OLB than a ILB. In that position, you need to be more proactive than reactive, so the instincts weakness shouldn't hurt as much, and the athleticism you help more.

Ideally, they keep both and cut Lowery and/or Lancaster. Clark, Slaton, Keke, and Rush and maybe one more should suffice.

No, Burks simply isn't a football player at any position.

As for the DL, they need guys who can eat up some snaps - that isn't slaton, unless he drops weight. We're stuck with Lancaster for at least another year.

[texaspackerbacker]

No, what the Packers need is some bulk and some quality to pair with Kenny Clark. Slaton should be that. Lowery and Lancaster showed nothing but weakness against either run or pass.

I'm not gonna waste much effort defending Burks except to say, I can see why the Packers still have some hope for him - sort of a puncher's chance to be decent. McDuffie maybe the same.

[run pMc]

Burks is a core ST player; that's why he's still on the team. Not much return on that investment, but they're trying to milk it for what it's worth. Smart guy, athletic, but not instinctive and that's an issue. Barnes has the best instincts of the off ball LBs and he's ok. I think McDuffie is a ST piece, maybe a depth piece, and likely replacement for Burks when his contract ends. I don't have high expectations for him, but you never know. He's kind of a Joe Thomas type and could be productive in small samples, but I'm skeptical he'd hold up at his size and am not sure about his instincts.

BC has cranked out some decent LBs, and he was the leading tackler... but I think that's a product of their defensive scheme.

[run pMc]

I like Slaton better than McDuffie. Not impressed with McDuffie based on what I saw (highlights, and vs. Notre Dame)
Slaton is raw but with his size could give Clark a breather or let him move around the line more. Those big guys shouldn't be playing 70% of the snaps... they'll wear down. I think by end of season he could give them 15 snaps a game if he takes to coaching... which is 15 less snaps for Lancaster, who is essentially JAG.

[bobblehead]

That's what everyone said about Burks...

I knew Burks was a lost cause from the get-go b/c he simply couldn't see the play developing - at all!! All the speed and athletic ability in the world is useless if you haven't a clue which way to go.

McDuffie wasn't as bad as Burks, but he was still pretty bad. If they keep him and cut Burks, I get it, but it's most likely a lateral move.

Its for ST play. They replace Burks with a younger version who is minimum salary for 4 years to play ST. If he somehow turns into a player, bonus.

[wist43]

Burks is a core ST player; that's why he's still on the team. Not much return on that investment, but they're trying to milk it for what it's worth. Smart guy, athletic, but not instinctive and that's an issue. Barnes has the best instincts of the off ball LBs and he's ok. I think McDuffie is a ST piece, maybe a depth piece, and likely replacement for Burks when his contract ends. I don't have high expectations for him, but you never know. He's kind of a Joe Thomas type and could be productive in small samples, but I'm skeptical he'd hold up at his size and am not sure about his instincts.

BC has cranked out some decent LBs, and he was the leading tackler... but I think that's a product of their defensive scheme.

I don't mind taking flyers on athletes in the 7th round and UDFA, but Burks was a 3rd rounder, and as I mentioned this year there were an unusual number of highly rated players that went undrafted b/c of reduced scouting and workouts due to covid.

PFF had Uphoff as a 3rd rounder and he went undrafted... there were quite a few guys like that - some CB's we could have used.

If McDuffie replaces Burks on the roster, that's well enough I guess.

[bobblehead]

This was the way you're supposed to conduct a draft. I don't know if Gutekunst knew how bad he fucked up last year, and wanted to make up for it this year or impress Rodgers or what, but somehow, good sense was used. You don't suppose those ongoing negotiations with Rodgers resulted in some Rodgers input, do you? hahahaha

Since Rodgers isn't talking to Gutes and wants him fired...no I do not.

[Joemailman]

I'm fine with a CB in rd1, I just would have preferred Campbell, but with Jenkins still there, and JOK... I would have gone with one of them.

I'm fine with an interior lineman in rd 2, except i would have preferred Creed.

Like the Rodgers pick, like the Newman, Hill, and Mcduffie picks as well.

Slaton is worth a flyer.

Slaton weighed in at 326 at rookie minicamp. Good news.

[texaspackerbacker]

I kinda like him as heavy as possible hahahahaha. Better a big solid blob like Gilbert Brown or Howard Green than a big soft lump getting pushed all around like Raji.

[bobblehead]

Changed my mind on McDuffie... watched more tape - think he's going to have a hard time sticking. Plays small, takes bad angles, poor technique in his coverage responsibilities.

Watched more tape of Newman too... he's got a chance to be a good player. Has a habit of getting his hands outside too much, but that can be coached up, and he's got the tools to develop.

I think I saw an article where they comped Newman's pro day to Bulaga's and it was near identical in size and every drill. That bodes well at least.

I also look at Charles and I see a little Micah Hyde in him. Just not a good enough athlete...until buffalo takes my advice, moves him to safety and then he is an all pro.

[Jaire]

REAL QUESTION

WHO in here would have picked Stokes over Christian Barmore ? or did we just go Need ? Need is what I thought we did round 2 for sure over BPA

Yeah. That's a big miss imo. Stokes is round 2. Barmore is a low round one guy. We just don't get many chances at those guys. And the need was equal imo.

The draft was salvaged (early prognostication) with Royce, Slaton, & Hill later but I'm still shaking my head at the first two picks. There were a lot of solid dbs in round 3. The back end is not as important as the DL (esp when you have 2 solid safeties and an all pro shut down corner). We struggled to get pressure against the very stout TB line. We struggled much more against the best front 7 since the Denver & Seattle teams that won Super bowls. Considering we lost in the trenches in the NFCCG (& amazingly still had a shot to win), that's where we should have gone. I've been screaming for RT & DL for 4 years.

On the good side Keke & now Slaton seem much better picks than past drafts where we failed miserably at picking DL except Clark who was a no brainer along with KC's even better pick.

Anyways, Royce and Slaton take away some of the sting. Myers seemed desperate to me.

Everything is fixed if AR comes back. More so if Gute is fired: there is no way to me the future is bright with this FO. Brandon was right here though too spammy

[SudsMcBucky]

Barmore is the guy I wanted when the thread was made prior to the draft. However, if they insisted on taking a CB in R1, from everyone I talk to down here in GA, Stokes is a great pick. They all like him much better than the guy the Jags took at the top of R2.

[Joemailman]

Probably no CB in college football faced as many of the top WR's in the country as Stokes did the last 2 years playing in the SEC. I think that plus the upside that goes with his speed made the Packers rate him a bit higher than the draft prognosticators. I see Stokes as an upside pick. Myers and Rodgers are low floor picks. Very little bust risk there who are great fits for what the Packers do.

[Upnorth]

Pre draft stokes was not on my radar as I only read the media's top cb opinions.
Post draft I dont know how he made it to us. When you combine upside with his level of competion he is better than I knew.
Him being abke to develop as a number 2 facing worse players than he is used to covering gives him time to learn.

I am so stoked for stokes (stoked is a 80's term for excited that was used in Saskatchewan when I was a teen)

[Joemailman]

Pre draft stokes was not on my radar as I only read the media's top cb opinions.
Post draft I dont know how he made it to us. When you combine upside with his level of competion he is better than I knew.
Him being abke to develop as a number 2 facing worse players than he is used to covering gives him time to learn.

I am so stoked for stokes (stoked is a 80's term for excited that was used in Saskatchewan when I was a teen)

Are you as stoked as this guy?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TTFhD9sczg

[Upnorth]

Are you as stoked as this guy?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TTFhD9sczg

I can't even, yes

[Jaire]

Looking again at the NFCCG, this draft was very tilted toward that game.

Gute was zoned in on CB and went to every single top cb work out in person. Stokes was the biggest risk cb picked in round one and a bit of a gamble. Not where I would have gone, especially with all the dbs we missed out on in recent past. This seems definitely a draft geared toward winning right now. I would have preferred a more BVA approach as usual. Just a philosophy that works out better on long and even short term.

[texaspackerbacker]

I don't see that Stokes is that much of a risk. You can either go with potential or with college performance when you draft. Stokes arguably is the best of both - his excellent size and speed as well as the fact that nobody in all college FB covered big time receivers remotely as well as Stokes. I have to confess, before the draft I was looking at the Northwestern guy as the best choice. But I'm extremely glad now that we got Stokes. It had to be a great Corner in the first round, and I'm satisfied we got the best.

We got what should be an instant O Line starter and maybe instant star in the second round. And we got a unique kind of WR that we didn't have and probably needed (plus kick returner) in the 3rd. Newman in the 4th seems solid and versatile. Slaton is exactly the kind of D Lineman I was hoping for - much more like Gilbert Brown and much less like damn Lowry and Lancaster. I have hope that St. Jean might actually be better than Chandon Sullivan. Hill seems like a late round bargain. Drafting a Badger O lineman is almost always a good idea. McDuffie? Who knows? If everybody else performs to expectations, they can afford to miss on him.

[Jaire]

I'm finally feeling better about the draft. Should be interesting. A lot of contribute-now guys along with last year's class and vets that are just peaking, this year is the AR's best shot

[Jaire]

I don't see that Stokes is that much of a risk. You can either go with potential or with college performance when you draft. Stokes arguably is the best of both - .....

Ok. Agreed. This pick makes complete sense now that I finally looked into him in depth (AR sidetrack really took me out of the draft).

This is a Ron Wolf (Al Davis protege) pick. I didn't believe the 4.2 speed but it's legit. Sam Shields is his floor, very good pair with Alexander. Never gave up a pass over 20 yards in SEC, still learning the position but has solid play already with lots of room for improvement. In hindsight Stokes is candy GB cannot pass on with a need at CB2. No wonder they thought they lucked out.

This can bring the secondary close to the 2010 level which clearly, at the subconscious level at least, is steering secondary draft choices since 2019. So much better than the many whiffs for years. Excited for the 2ndary.

I'm officially on the stoked band wagon. This whole team is primed to dominate this year and we're already one of six plays away from beating the most stacked NFC team (Bucs) in many years. The dline could use a couple more bodies. But two new WRS, three catchers peaking, restocked line, Gary emerging. Dillon. Deguara. Rooks that will contribute. It's like a double draft class with the guys that will 1st play this year.

[wist43]

Ok. Agreed. This pick makes complete sense now that I finally looked into him in depth (AR sidetrack really took me out of the draft).

This is a Ron Wolf (Al Davis protege) pick. I didn't believe the 4.2 speed but it's legit. Sam Shields is his floor, very good pair with Alexander. Never gave up a pass over 20 yards in SEC, still learning the position but has solid play already with lots of room for improvement. In hindsight Stokes is candy GB cannot pass on with a need at CB2. No wonder they thought they lucked out.

This can bring the secondary close to the 2010 level which clearly, at the subconscious level at least, is steering secondary draft choices since 2019. So much better than the many whiffs for years. Excited for the 2ndary.

I'm officially on the stoked band wagon. This whole team is primed to dominate this year and we're already one of six plays away from beating the most stacked NFC team (Bucs) in many years. The dline could use a couple more bodies. But two new WRS, three catchers peaking, restocked line, Gary emerging. Dillon. Deguara. Rooks that will contribute. It's like a double draft class with the guys that will 1st play this year.

I wanna believe Stokes is a player, but his instincts and possibly study habits might be issues.

He doesn't see routes the way he should, and as a result his footwork is very sloppy. He gets wrong-footed a lot, and against NFL WR's that will get him beat like a stepchild.

I'm hoping some good coaching will clean that stuff up.

[Jaire]

He's still learning the position


He has everything to succeed (good coach, super high IQ)

One thing you can't teach is speed. I like this pick much more than many past dbs and see why he's so high on GB's board.

[SudsMcBucky]

I wanna believe Stokes is a player, but his instincts and possibly study habits might be issues.

He doesn't see routes the way he should, and as a result his footwork is very sloppy. He gets wrong-footed a lot, and against NFL WR's that will get him beat like a stepchild.

I'm hoping some good coaching will clean that stuff up.

He's already been playing against NFL WR's and wasn't getting beat like a stepchild.

[Zool]

He's already been playing against NFL WR's and wasn't getting beat like a stepchild.

Yup. Maybe he'll hit, maybe he won't. But he's already proven himself against quite a few first-round WRs.

[call_me_ishmael]

He's already been playing against NFL WR's and wasn't getting beat like a stepchild.

Great point.

[SudsMcBucky]

Barmore is the guy I wanted when the thread was made prior to the draft. However, if they insisted on taking a CB in R1, from everyone I talk to down here in GA, Stokes is a great pick. They all like him much better than the guy the Jags took at the top of R2.

I know we're only 2 games in, but in his limited but growing action, he seems like he's going to be a really good pick.

[call_me_ishmael]

Seems like Gooter knows how to pick a CB. Now if only Rashan Gary wasn't ass he'd be in business. He is the Michigan Man.

[Upnorth]

Seems like Gooter knows how to pick a CB. Now if only Rashan Gary wasn't ass he'd be in business. He is the Michigan Man.

Stokes is looking very good so far.
Gary looked ok. Per pff He got pressure on 19.1% of his snaps. Thats solid

[call_me_ishmael]

Gary looked like crap last night in my untrained opinion. He has the opportunity of a life time right now and has done nothing with it. I kind of think he is just not physically capable of it. Might be fast as hell but no moves or something.

[Upnorth]

Gary looked like crap last night in my untrained opinion. He has the opportunity of a life time right now and has done nothing with it. I kind of think he is just not physically capable of it. Might be fast as hell but no moves or something.

19.1% pressure rate, drove rb back into the middle with contain. Shutdown passing lanes when asked (watch the garvin near sack). Yup that sounds exactly not like garbage.