Our FAs and off season's concerns?

[Gunakor]

Re: Jennings

Unless I read incorrectly, the list was in response to the claim that "Harrell will go down as one of the top 5 dumbest draft picks ever in Packer history", when in fact he will be "lucky" to make the top 10.

I'd agree, though if Harrell never gets healthy enough to start a game then I'd have to disagree with quite a few names on the list. Any first round pick that can't start a game for the team who drafted him can't be considered a bigger bust than those who have, regardless of how well they played in those starts. To this point, Harrell has been a bigger bust than Buckley, Mandarich (although Mandarich being drafted #1 overall is a valid argument), Edwards, Michels, Carroll, etc. Poor performance is still better than no performance.

[sharpe1027]

Re: Jennings

I'd agree, though if Harrell never gets healthy enough to start a game then I'd have to disagree with quite a few names on the list. Any first round pick that can't start a game for the team who drafted him can't be considered a bigger bust than those who have, regardless of how well they played in those starts. To this point, Harrell has been a bigger bust than Buckley, Mandarich (although Mandarich being drafted #1 overall is a valid argument), Edwards, Michels, Carroll, etc. Poor performance is still better than no performance.

Makes sense, but I don't think that whether or not a player started is the end of performance analysis. I could make a good argument that many starting performances were worse than Harrell's backup duty. All starters are not created equal. Pickett and Jolly are decent players. Who did those other guys have to beat out to earn their starting positions?

At the end of the day, Harrell is a mid-first round pick that has been part of the DL rotation when healthy. Disappointing injury history? Absolutely. In contention for top 5 worst pick ever? Hardly.

[cheesner]

Re: Jennings

I'd agree, though if Harrell never gets healthy enough to start a game then I'd have to disagree with quite a few names on the list. Any first round pick that can't start a game for the team who drafted him can't be considered a bigger bust than those who have, regardless of how well they played in those starts. To this point, Harrell has been a bigger bust than Buckley, Mandarich (although Mandarich being drafted #1 overall is a valid argument), Edwards, Michels, Carroll, etc. Poor performance is still better than no performance.

Makes sense, but I don't think that whether or not a player started is the end of performance analysis. I could make a good argument that many starting performances were worse than Harrell's backup duty. All starters are not created equal. Pickett and Jolly are decent players. Who did those other guys have to beat out to earn their starting positions?

At the end of the day, Harrell is a mid-first round pick that has been part of the DL rotation when healthy. Disappointing injury history? Absolutely. In contention for top 5 worst pick ever? Hardly.

Harrell has actually played well at times and has shown promise. If his career fails because of injuries, well, it was a gamble on greatness. Some of the players on the list simply sucked (mandarich), refused to play for the Team (Clark), the coaches didn't want him on the team (Rich Campbell) or were character problems (Brent 'I was out late last night so I can't play coach' Fullwood. They leave you scratching your head as to why the team would have drafted them.

\