TT's three year drafting scorecard.

[Patler]

Much has been said about TT's draft empasis on defense. His three year tally is:

1st round - 1 offense, 2 defense
2nd round - 4 offense, 1 defense
3rd round - 2 offense, 2 defense
4th round - 2 offense, 3 defense
5th round - 4 offense, 1 defense
6th round - 1 offense, 4 defense
7th round - 3 offense, 2 defense

I didn't count Crosby, the kicker. I also did not count the linebacker they say they will try at fullback.

Through the 1st two rounds, its 5 to 3 offense
On the first day, its 7 to 5, offense
Overall, its 17 to 15 offense.

With three 1st round picks he has gone 2 to 1 for the defense. (Obviously, with 3 picks, one side of the ball would be ahead!) Otherwise, he appears slightly biased toward the offense.

[gureski]

What did you count Blackmon and C.Rogers as? Either Rogers or Blackmon was a CB turned WR his senior year that was drafted as a Kick return possibility. One year of WR shouldn't make him an offensive pick.

[Ballboy]

We will be the Ravens-Bears of years gone by.

Our defense will be tops in the league, but our offense will NOT be able to score....we will not have a QB after Brett leaves, but from year to year we will have journeymen running the show. Yes, we may get lucky like the Ravens and sneak in a Super Bowl based SOLEY on the defense, but I can hear the cries already...What if we still had Brett?

TT has put himself in a position not to be the bad guy in the Brett saga. He is trying to force Bretts hand to either get him to retire or "force" the team to trade him just like Walker/McKenzie(sp?) Then, when either of the two happen, TT can say "what was I going to do? He didn't want to play here or wanted to retire." This is the ego-maniac that ALL GM's are....they ARE GM's, NOT fans as you an I are.

[wist43]

The Packers defense will never be to the level of the Bears or Ravens...

Both of those teams use(d) blitzing schemes - an advantage of the 3-4 - the Packers on the other hand, play a very passive scheme completely dependent on generating pressure with their front 4. The Packers LB's are more of a liability on the blitz than they are a help.

Poppinga could be a decent pass rusher, but he doesn't play in the nickel or dime... Hawk and Barnett simply aren't blitzers.

Unless you have 4 monsters up front, it's almost impossible to expect your front 4 to generate consistent pressure w/o the blitz - and the Packers can't blitz.

They can have a decent defense, but it'll never be a lights out type of defense that can carry an offensively challenged team to a championship.

[Patler]

What did you count Blackmon and C.Rogers as? Either Rogers or Blackmon was a CB turned WR his senior year that was drafted as a Kick return possibility. One year of WR shouldn't make him an offensive pick.

I counted them where the Packers drafted them to play, Blackmon on defense, Rodgers on offense. Blackmon is the one who played offense as a Senior, but I counted him on defense, where he plays now. I also edited my first post to show that I did not count the linebacker, Hall, because the Packers claim they will play him at fullback, but until camp starts we really can't say for sure.

[run pMc]

Thanks for posting, patler.

Anybody know what Sherman's drafts look like?

34 picks (32 + Crosby + Hall) across 3 drafts is a pretty big number of picks.

It suggests a few things to me:
The bottom half of the roster was pretty talent poor when TT signed on.
TT is going for the "Jimmy Johnson/even a blind squirrel finds a nut"-style of finding players. I hope it works.
With 17 picks on O -- an average of almost 6 per draft -- it makes one wonder if how much grousing our starting QB should be doing as far as the organization not bringing in guys (i.e., a rapidly aging Moss) to help. I suppose that's a topic for another thread.
Having 5 2nd round picks is pretty impressive; too bad Murphy didn't pan out. If he had I think people wouldn't be howling (as much) about the WR situation or Javon wanting out of town.

[woodbuck27]

Much has been said about TT's draft empasis on defense. His three year tally is:

1st round - 1 offense, 2 defense
2nd round - 4 offense, 1 defense
3rd round - 2 offense, 2 defense
4th round - 2 offense, 3 defense
5th round - 4 offense, 1 defense
6th round - 1 offense, 4 defense
7th round - 3 offense, 2 defense

I didn't count Crosby, the kicker. I also did not count the linebacker they say they will try at fullback.

Through the 1st two rounds, its 5 to 3 offense
On the first day, its 7 to 5, offense
Overall, its 17 to 15 offense.

With three 1st round picks he has gone 2 to 1 for the defense. (Obviously, with 3 picks, one side of the ball would be ahead!) Otherwise, he appears slightly biased toward the offense.

With those picks Patler.

How many TD's did they score? How many yards did they gain via the air?How many yards did they rush? :)

[prsnfoto]

What you really have here is a lesson in quanity over quality, I could see doing that in the 2005 draft when Sherman had depleted the depth but, the bottom line is we have seen little to no production from any of his Offensive picks except the linemen and 1/2 season of Jennings. I admit the Murphy pick was bad luck. I respect your post Patler but this is a case of stats that don't mean shit, all the playmakers on this team are still from the Wolf/Sherman era on Offense, or should I say were there ain't many left.

[pbmax]

I think you might see a change in strategy after the special teams pick up. Three different Special Teams coaches can't all be bad, and our STs have stunk for a long while.

Doesn't that mean the bottom of the roster was/is weak?

Wist, didn't the old 46 Bears, the Tobin Bear D and the new Bears play the 4-3? I mean, blitzing or no, the Bears start three linebackers now in the Lovie Smith Cover 2. And with Rivera gone, that might change. Tampa used to blitz far more with corners than LBs.

And Rivera's D background was with Jim Johnson in Philly.

[pacfan]

Much has been said about TT's draft empasis on defense. His three year tally is:

1st round - 1 offense, 2 defense
2nd round - 4 offense, 1 defense
3rd round - 2 offense, 2 defense
4th round - 2 offense, 3 defense
5th round - 4 offense, 1 defense
6th round - 1 offense, 4 defense
7th round - 3 offense, 2 defense

I didn't count Crosby, the kicker. I also did not count the linebacker they say they will try at fullback.

Through the 1st two rounds, its 5 to 3 offense
On the first day, its 7 to 5, offense
Overall, its 17 to 15 offense.

With three 1st round picks he has gone 2 to 1 for the defense. (Obviously, with 3 picks, one side of the ball would be ahead!) Otherwise, he appears slightly biased toward the offense.

With those picks Patler.

How many TD's did they score? How many yards did they gain via the air?How many yards did they rush? :)

yeah and what was their favorite color too? :P

[Scott Campbell]

Anybody know what Sherman's drafts look like?


Yeah. They looked like crap.

[Bretsky]

Under Ted Thompson's watch he allowed Wahle, Flanagan, Rivera, Javon Walker, Ahman Green, and David Martin leave via free agency.

Right or wrong, how could he NOT focus on offense ? Did he have any other chance but to stock up on OL....WR ?

I'm not one to rip TT for neglecting the offense, but I'm CERTAINLY NOT going to praise him for stocking it up either.

At this point in his reign the offense seems to be weaker than when he took over. Hopefully that will change.

[Bretsky]

I think you might see a change in strategy after the special teams pick up. Three different Special Teams coaches can't all be bad, and our STs have stunk for a long while.

Doesn't that mean the bottom of the roster was/is weak?

Wist, didn't the old 46 Bears, the Tobin Bear D and the new Bears play the 4-3? I mean, blitzing or no, the Bears start three linebackers now in the Lovie Smith Cover 2. And with Rivera gone, that might change. Tampa used to blitz far more with corners than LBs.

And Rivera's D background was with Jim Johnson in Philly.


I get a kick out of people ripping our special teams coaches. The former one, John Bohnemengo sp? , succeeded before Green Bay, and he's doing just fine now.

It's more accurate to say our special teams players stink. Speaking of, where is Allen Rossum ? It'd be nice to have another return man who is a real threat again.

[wist43]

I think you might see a change in strategy after the special teams pick up. Three different Special Teams coaches can't all be bad, and our STs have stunk for a long while.

Doesn't that mean the bottom of the roster was/is weak?

Wist, didn't the old 46 Bears, the Tobin Bear D and the new Bears play the 4-3? I mean, blitzing or no, the Bears start three linebackers now in the Lovie Smith Cover 2. And with Rivera gone, that might change. Tampa used to blitz far more with corners than LBs.

And Rivera's D background was with Jim Johnson in Philly.

They run 4-3's but they are completely different schemes... the Packers stack their LB's inside the DE's more often than not, and they sit there static until the snap, read and react.

The DT's aren't exclusively 2 gap tackles, they do have some wiggle and ability to penetrate, but they are more 2 gappers than they are 1 gappers. The Packers don't have anyone nearly as good as Tommie Harris.

As for the 46 defense the Bears ran back in the 80's - look at that defense... pro bowlers everywhere. Their DL was nothing short of awesome - Otis Wilson, Wilbur Marshall, Fencik, etc... can't remember all of them - but they were all good. Besides the talent, the 46 defense was revolutionary, and really caught offenses completely off guard. Eventually offenses caught up with their protection schemes, but it took a couple of years.

[wist43]

Under Ted Thompson's watch he allowed Wahle, Flanagan, Rivera, Javon Walker, Ahman Green, and David Martin leave via free agency.

Right or wrong, how could he NOT focus on offense ? Did he have any other chance but to stock up on OL....WR ?

I'm not one to rip TT for neglecting the offense, but I'm CERTAINLY NOT going to praise him for stocking it up either.

At this point in his reign the offense seems to be weaker than when he took over. Hopefully that will change.

He did replace all those guys:

Colledge for Wahle (worse)
Wells for Flanigan (worse)
Spitz for Rivera (worse)
Jennings for Walker (worse)
Jackson/Morency for Green (worse)
Harris for Martin (big bunch of, "who cares")

Of course some of that turnover was necessary. Rivera and Flanigan were nearing the end; but Wahle, Walker, and Green make no sense to me. When you have pro bowl players, you keep them... Green's departure is rationally debatable, but Walker and Wahle were both in their primes.

We're seeing the results of all that turnover on the field, i.e. a completely anemic offense that can't score pts.

[Patler]

What you really have here is a lesson in quanity over quality, I could see doing that in the 2005 draft when Sherman had depleted the depth but, the bottom line is we have seen little to no production from any of his Offensive picks except the linemen and 1/2 season of Jennings. I admit the Murphy pick was bad luck. I respect your post Patler but this is a case of stats that don't mean shit, all the playmakers on this team are still from the Wolf/Sherman era on Offense, or should I say were there ain't many left.

Well, it does mean something. People have said that he IGNORED the offense in the draft,and that obviosly isn't true. Too mnay fans, in my opinion, are looking for instant gratification, not team building.

You're not going to get instant gratification from the O-lineman he has drafted (without checking, I think 6 of the 17 were O-line), but these guys can be the foundation upon which offenses for the next 10 years are built.

A rookie QB rarely gives instant gratification, but with an old Favre who debates from year to year whether or not he will play, Rodgers was a pick he almost had to make.

Jennings provided some instant gratification. I believe Murphy would have, too. The injury was a bummer.

For those wanting instant flash and gratification, TT has brought in 3 players this year, maybe even a fourth that could give that that to you. This is the first time he has emphasized skill positions on offense, with the hope that they contribute immediately. Last year he emphasized O-linemen, with the hope they would contribute immediately, and seemingly he did pretty well. This year, those linemen will have a year of experience and development to pave the way as the rookie skill position players arrive with every opportunity to show what they can do. Let's see if TT did as well drafting skill position players as he might have done with linemen last year.

[Patler]

He did replace all those guys:

Colledge for Wahle (worse)
Wells for Flanigan (worse)
Spitz for Rivera (worse)
Jennings for Walker (worse)
Jackson/Morency for Green (worse)
Harris for Martin (big bunch of, "who cares")

Of course some of that turnover was necessary. Rivera and Flanigan were nearing the end; but Wahle, Walker, and Green make no sense to me. When you have pro bowl players, you keep them... Green's departure is rationally debatable, but Walker and Wahle were both in their primes.

We're seeing the results of all that turnover on the field, i.e. a completely anemic offense that can't score pts.

Colledge in 2006 was not as good as Wahle would have been in 2006, but Colledge as a rookie was MUCH better than Wahle as a rookie. Of course that does not mean that Colledge will develope into what Wahle did. However, Wahle is a very good guard, but not an elite guard. He made one pro bowl as an injury substitute. He is a very good run blocker, not as good in pass protection. Besides, TT didn't happily dump Wahle. It was almost an impossibility to keep him, especially with Sharper refusing to renegotiate. Sharper's contract was the single biggest source of potential cap space to get the room to pay Wahle.

I'm not sure that Spitz in 2006 wasn't almost as good as Rivera in 2006. I watched a few Dallas games, and Rivera was struggling big time. His pass protection was very bad. He couldn't seem to move his feet. With the leg, ankle and back injuries he has had that is not surprising. He survived with smarts alone.

Wells was better in 2006 than Flanagan was in 2005. Wells isn't yet as good as Flanagan was a few seasons earlier, but Flanagan had to be replaced. He only played 3 games in 2004. He played 14 in 2005 for GB, but not very well. He only lasted 9 games with Houston last year. Replacing Flanagan with Wells was something that had to be done.

We don't yet know if Jackson/Morrency for Green in 2007 is worse or not. The heart is there with Green, he ran hard in 2006, but I'm not sure he can still get it done. Too many times I saw Green stumbling last year, which generally means a loss of foot speed. Maybe we should wait to see how Jackson/Morrency and Green actually perform in 2007 before we decide if it is worse or not. We still remember the Green of 2003-2004. He isn't the same player anymore. It remains to be seen how far away from that he will be in 2007.

You seem to be hung up on what some players were 3 or 4 years ago, which in the NFL is a lifetime. Teams change. Preferrably it is gradual, a few each year. The problem with the Packer offense was that it had remained static for about 4 years, with no depth built in behind the starters to take over for them. When they all started getting old, or entered contract years, there were no replacements available.

[mmmdk]

Don't forget Terrance Murphy; the guy was pretty good in colledge and was turning into a pro and probably a starter. I've got the Caroline game (the near comeback) on DVD but I can't watch it.

[wist43]

Patler, I'm not "hung up" on what players were 3-4 years ago, and as I mentioned in my post, some of those guys were near the end, and I wouldn't have resigned them (Rivera and Flanigan).

The fact remains that the replacements aren't as good as the outgoing players... I don't ever see Wells as being as good as Flanigan or Winters - to me, Wells is a fringe player b/c of his lack of size; nor do I see Colledge or Spitz as ever being as good as Wahle and Rivera. I do regard Wahle as an elite G - pro bowls are popularity contests.

As for Green, yes he is nearing the end, but given that they have nothing to replace him, and he was productive last year - got the tough yds that Morency will never be able to get - I would have resigned him. To me, Jackson and Morency look like the same player. MM and TT claim he's a tough inside runner, but over the course of a full season, I don't see it.

The end result is that the Packers are retooling, and are taking the long view - the very long view - without regard to winning now... scoring pts is going to be like pulling teeth this year.

[Patler]

If players had to be replaced, why write a post that has an overtone of criticism for replacing them? Why even include the Flanaga/Wells comparison. Essentially your argument is that Wells was not as good in 2006 as Flanagan was in 2003. So what?

Most of the time when you replace a veteran with a rookie or inexperienced player there is a regression from what the vet was in his best years. Maybe temporary and hopefully shortlived. Often the replacement is just as good as the veteran would have been at the end of his career. Flanagan and Rivera are examples of that. Green (who personally I wish we had kept) might be an example too. I will wait for 2007 to play out before judging whether replacing Green with Morrency/Jackson was "worse" or not.

Neither Wahle nor Rivera were very good when they took over as starters. After Rivera's first year as a starter there was much debate about if his pass protection would ever be good enough to remain a starter. Wahle went back to the bench after his first year as a starter.

Wolf let Taylor, Timmerman, Paup, Hentrick, Cecil and many other very good players go. The players who replaced them were not as good initially. It happens all the time.

[PackerBlues]

What you really have here is a lesson in quanity over quality, I could see doing that in the 2005 draft when Sherman had depleted the depth but, the bottom line is we have seen little to no production from any of his Offensive picks except the linemen and 1/2 season of Jennings. I admit the Murphy pick was bad luck. I respect your post Patler but this is a case of stats that don't mean shit, all the playmakers on this team are still from the Wolf/Sherman era on Offense, or should I say were there ain't many left.

I agree.

[PackerBlues]

Anybody know what Sherman's drafts look like?


Yeah. They looked like crap.

If Shermans drafts looked like crap, how do we then rate Teds?

Shermans very first draft pick : Javon Walker. A very productive player who immediately contributed. (What ever happened to that guy anyway?)

Thompsons very first draft pick in GB : Aaron Rogers. A very talented bench warmer who also has the amazing ability to hold a clipboard. WOOT WOOT!!!

[Patler]

What you really have here is a lesson in quanity over quality, I could see doing that in the 2005 draft when Sherman had depleted the depth but, the bottom line is we have seen little to no production from any of his Offensive picks except the linemen and 1/2 season of Jennings. I admit the Murphy pick was bad luck. I respect your post Patler but this is a case of stats that don't mean shit, all the playmakers on this team are still from the Wolf/Sherman era on Offense, or should I say were there ain't many left.

I agree.

If Colledge, Spitz, Moll, Rodgers, Jackson and Hall are starters six years from now, and Jones, Jennings and Clowney are among the top 4 receivers on the team, will it still have meant nothing?

Maybe we should wait to see if Jennings, Jackson, Jones, Clowney or Wynn can become playmakers before concluding that TT has not drafted any playmakers.

[Patler]

Shermans very first draft pick : Javon Walker. A very productive player who immediately contributed. (What ever happened to that guy anyway?)



Immediately contributed? Apparently you have forgotten all the "Is he a wasted draft pick?" articles that follwed Walker's first season. :D

[Zool]

Ahh Patler. The only one with enough ambition to fight the good fight.

[Fritz]

Truth is, PackerBlues, there's no way to say how Rodgers will turn out. It is safe to say that he's not better than Brett Favre, but you could say that about any QB taken since 2005.

Mike Sherman had some hits (Walker, Wells, Corey Williams, Nick Barnett, Davenpoop, Cullen Jenkins, Aaron Kampman) and some misses (BJ, Donnell Washington, Ahmad Carroll, Joey Thomas, James Lee, etc.). Perhaps his greatest error as a draft person was sacrificing developing young talent (depth) in an attempt to "hit big" by trading up. It worked in Javon Walker's case but not in any others I am aware of.

It's still too soon to judge Thompson's drafts. We'll know more at the end of the season about TT's first draft. Next year we'll know more about his second draft. And, if by the end of 2008 the Pack is not clearly becoming a serious contender - not just a 9-7 sneak-in-the-back-door-first round-loser-playoff team, my sense is that TT will be shown the door.

[Bretsky]

What you really have here is a lesson in quanity over quality, I could see doing that in the 2005 draft when Sherman had depleted the depth but, the bottom line is we have seen little to no production from any of his Offensive picks except the linemen and 1/2 season of Jennings. I admit the Murphy pick was bad luck. I respect your post Patler but this is a case of stats that don't mean shit, all the playmakers on this team are still from the Wolf/Sherman era on Offense, or should I say were there ain't many left.

I agree.

If Colledge, Spitz, Moll, Rodgers, Jackson and Hall are starters six years from now, and Jones, Jennings and Clowney are among the top 4 receivers on the team, will it still have meant nothing?


Maybe we should wait to see if Jennings, Jackson, Jones, Clowney or Wynn can become playmakers before concluding that TT has not drafted any playmakers.

The debate is more about patience. And the more you have the more you like TT.

I think TT has did a solid job drafting the past two years.

Jennings surly might be a playmaker; ditto for those two yahoo's we drafted at WR this year :wink:

But up to this point on the Turtle's watch our offensive playmakers went from Favre, Driver, Walker, and Green (if you include him).

to

Favre and Driver.

[Bretsky]

Shermans very first draft pick : Javon Walker. A very productive player who immediately contributed. (What ever happened to that guy anyway?)



Immediately contributed? Apparently you have forgotten all the "Is he a wasted draft pick?" articles that follwed Walker's first season. :D

Yes, Walker was vere raw in year one and he didn't light it up year two either. But like Favre, IMO you could see the talent was definitely there if he had the heart to let it develop.

[Fritz]

What you really have here is a lesson in quanity over quality, I could see doing that in the 2005 draft when Sherman had depleted the depth but, the bottom line is we have seen little to no production from any of his Offensive picks except the linemen and 1/2 season of Jennings. I admit the Murphy pick was bad luck. I respect your post Patler but this is a case of stats that don't mean shit, all the playmakers on this team are still from the Wolf/Sherman era on Offense, or should I say were there ain't many left.

I agree.

If Colledge, Spitz, Moll, Rodgers, Jackson and Hall are starters six years from now, and Jones, Jennings and Clowney are among the top 4 receivers on the team, will it still have meant nothing?


Maybe we should wait to see if Jennings, Jackson, Jones, Clowney or Wynn can become playmakers before concluding that TT has not drafted any playmakers.

The debate is more about patience. And the more you have the more you like TT.
I think TT has did a solid job drafting the past two years.

Jennings surly might be a playmaker; ditto for those two yahoo's we drafted at WR this year :wink:

But up to this point on the Turtle's watch our offensive playmakers went from Favre, Driver, Walker, and Green (if you include him).

to

Favre and Driver.

I think this is a very astute observation, Bretsky.

[PackerBlues]

What you really have here is a lesson in quanity over quality, I could see doing that in the 2005 draft when Sherman had depleted the depth but, the bottom line is we have seen little to no production from any of his Offensive picks except the linemen and 1/2 season of Jennings. I admit the Murphy pick was bad luck. I respect your post Patler but this is a case of stats that don't mean shit, all the playmakers on this team are still from the Wolf/Sherman era on Offense, or should I say were there ain't many left.

I agree.

If Colledge, Spitz, Moll, Rodgers, Jackson and Hall are starters six years from now, and Jones, Jennings and Clowney are among the top 4 receivers on the team, will it still have meant nothing?

Maybe we should wait to see if Jennings, Jackson, Jones, Clowney or Wynn can become playmakers before concluding that TT has not drafted any playmakers.

OR.........Maybe we should wait to see if Jennings, Jackson, Jones, Clowney or Wynn can become players before concluding that TT has drafted any playmakers.

[Scott Campbell]

Shermans very first draft pick : Javon Walker. A very productive player who immediately contributed.

Javon Walker 2002 23 receptions 319 yards 1 TD

Greg Jennings 2006 45 receptions 632 yards 3 TD's (with an injury)

[Patler]

What you really have here is a lesson in quanity over quality, I could see doing that in the 2005 draft when Sherman had depleted the depth but, the bottom line is we have seen little to no production from any of his Offensive picks except the linemen and 1/2 season of Jennings. I admit the Murphy pick was bad luck. I respect your post Patler but this is a case of stats that don't mean shit, all the playmakers on this team are still from the Wolf/Sherman era on Offense, or should I say were there ain't many left.

I agree.

If Colledge, Spitz, Moll, Rodgers, Jackson and Hall are starters six years from now, and Jones, Jennings and Clowney are among the top 4 receivers on the team, will it still have meant nothing?

Maybe we should wait to see if Jennings, Jackson, Jones, Clowney or Wynn can become playmakers before concluding that TT has not drafted any playmakers.

OR.........Maybe we should wait to see if Jennings, Jackson, Jones, Clowney or Wynn can become players before concluding that TT has drafted any playmakers.

I never concluded that he has drafted playmakers, just potential ones (note the phrase "wait to see if ....can become playmakers"). I have always advocated a position of letting them at least attend one training camp before reaching ANY CONCLUSION. However, many fans seem ready to dismsiss them before they even sign a contract.

[PackerBlues]

Shermans very first draft pick : Javon Walker. A very productive player who immediately contributed.

Javon Walker 2002 23 receptions 319 yards 1 TD

Greg Jennings 2006 45 receptions 632 yards 3 TD's (with an injury)

LOL.....I had a feeling that I would get busted using the word "immediately" with you guys.

I think you know what I am saying though, Walker was a guy that you "felt" would have a huge impact. We have gotten no use out of Rogers at all. No more use than we would have gotten from any of the other nearly 200 or so QB's who have come and gone while Favre just "keeps on tickin".

As for Jennings, I love the kid. I am hoping that he turns out to be the next Robert Brooks for the Packers. But if you will allow me to compare Jennings to Robert Brooks (please oh please, lol) then I think you could compare Walker to Sterling Sharpe.

[retailguy]

Shermans very first draft pick : Javon Walker. A very productive player who immediately contributed.

Javon Walker 2002 23 receptions 319 yards 1 TD

Greg Jennings 2006 45 receptions 632 yards 3 TD's (with an injury)

2002 receiving corps - Donald Driver/Terry Glenn

2006 receiving corps - Donald Driver/.........

think that had any effect? Jennings, by breathing, was more important in 2006 than Walker needed to be in 2002.

[PackerBlues]

Shermans very first draft pick : Javon Walker. A very productive player who immediately contributed.

Javon Walker 2002 23 receptions 319 yards 1 TD

Greg Jennings 2006 45 receptions 632 yards 3 TD's (with an injury)

2002 receiving corps - Donald Driver/Terry Glenn

2006 receiving corps - Donald Driver/.........

think that had any effect? Jennings, by breathing, was more important in 2006 than Walker needed to be in 2002.

:smack: OOOF! Thats gonna leave a mark! Great point.

[Patler]

Shermans very first draft pick : Javon Walker. A very productive player who immediately contributed.

Javon Walker 2002 23 receptions 319 yards 1 TD

Greg Jennings 2006 45 receptions 632 yards 3 TD's (with an injury)

2002 receiving corps - Donald Driver/Terry Glenn

2006 receiving corps - Donald Driver/.........

think that had any effect? Jennings, by breathing, was more important in 2006 than Walker needed to be in 2002.

The biggest problem with Walker in 2002 was not his stats per se, it was that he seemed to drop a pass for every two he caught. His drops were so bad and so frequent that he even apologized to Favre for them (Nice gesture on his part.) I did not have a good feeling at all about Walker in 2002, or even at the start of 2003. I wasn't down on him, but he certainly hadn't yet shown himself to be worthy of a 1st round pick. About mid-year in 2003 he seemed to begin settling in. Even so, at the start of 2004, Ferguson was penciled in as the starter, because no one was sure if Walker truly had arrived the second half of 2003, or if he just happened to put together some good games. He was still in the "is he or isn't he" category. It didn't take long in 2004 for him to convince everyone that he in fact had arrived.

[Scott Campbell]

Shermans very first draft pick : Javon Walker. A very productive player who immediately contributed.

Javon Walker 2002 23 receptions 319 yards 1 TD

Greg Jennings 2006 45 receptions 632 yards 3 TD's (with an injury)

2002 receiving corps - Donald Driver/Terry Glenn

2006 receiving corps - Donald Driver/.........

think that had any effect? Jennings, by breathing, was more important in 2006 than Walker needed to be in 2002.


Probably. Though my only point was that his contribution wasn't all that immediate. It was pretty marginal - regardless of the circumstances. He didn't start out the next year that hot either - when Terry Glenn was playing for Dallas.

I can't hold it against Jennings for stepping up and taking advantage of the opportunity he was given.

[Scott Campbell]

\I think you know what I am saying though, Walker was a guy that you "felt" would have a huge impact. We have gotten no use out of Rogers at all.


Well that's been by design. Rodgers was not drafted to contribute immediately. We all hoped he'd be sitting on the bench looking stupid while Brett plays out his career. And the longer he does that, the better.

With 3 and 4 receiver sets, you expect your 1st round WR's to see the field as rookies, and hope they make some kind of an impact.

[Patler]

Shermans very first draft pick : Javon Walker. A very productive player who immediately contributed.

Javon Walker 2002 23 receptions 319 yards 1 TD

Greg Jennings 2006 45 receptions 632 yards 3 TD's (with an injury)

2002 receiving corps - Donald Driver/Terry Glenn

2006 receiving corps - Donald Driver/.........

think that had any effect? Jennings, by breathing, was more important in 2006 than Walker needed to be in 2002.

:smack: OOOF! Thats gonna leave a mark! Great point.

Actually, it's misleading. Walker was drafted to be an immediate contributer.

The leading wide receivers in 2001 were Freeman, Schroeder and Bradford. All were gone in 2002, Schroeder and Bradford via free agency and Freeman released as no longer considered worth the money. Driver had been #4 on the depth chart. Coming into the 2002 season, Driver had played 3 seasons with only two starts. He had a total of 37 career receptions. No one was counting on him. Ferguson was a nonfactor coming out of 2001. Glenn was traded for, but was coming out of an injury filled season in 2001 in which he played off and on but started only 1 game and finished with 14 receptions.

When Walker was drafted, the Packers had no wide receivers that could be counted on at all.