Tweet
I don't remember draft grades from previous years too well, but I do not remember a year when many of the draft experts gave the Pack A's. Now hopefully Raji and Matthews turn into A prospect and help the Pack defense become a top 10 defense.
-
-
USA Today with a B+. Fan voting gave the Packers the best draft on the USA Today website.
GRADE: B+
• Green Bay Packers: Shift to 3-4 dictated first two picks and they should be good ones. DT B.J. Raji will be the interior space-eater. He's 6-1, 323 pounds and uses leverage well. Acquired another No. 1 pick to get OLB Clay Matthews. He could start on the weak side. Other crying need was at OT, where Mark Tauscher and Chad Clifton both come off surgeries and are heading into sunset years. T.J. Lang brings size and a mauler's attitude."There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted ThompsonComment
-
Gotta be on paper TT best draft to date.If you're not a Packer fan, you're not a football fan!Comment
-
It's the realization that we got a player that filled a need, AND was arguably the BPA with the Raji pick - then filled another need with a guy who was taken right around where he should've been with Mathews.
The Pack and TT are getting credit for filling needs without reaching.--
Imagine for a moment a world without hypothetical situations...Comment
-
LOL...Originally posted by MJZiggy
Yes, I give it an A... just for Raji
Haven't really had time to look at the second day much, but from little I've seen, I like day two as well...
Was shocked, shocked I tell you, that TT pulled the trigger on Raji... big time player, that filled a major need.
Believe it or not, I actually have hope now
wistComment
-
A- here.
Green Bay Packers: A-minus
They targeted defensive help and got it. Defensive tackle B.J. Raji is a run-stuffer with agility, and outside linebacker Clay Matthews is excellent in pass coverage. Both might start in Week 1. Tackle T.J. Lang and fullback Quinn Johnson are physical blockers. This team should be improved."There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted ThompsonComment
-
Guess I'm with DD here.
Looks good, but let's wait until we see some on field indicators, eh?
B, but well could be an A.Comment
-
Numbers, for those that are interested.
90 B.J. Raji
52 Clay Matthews
70 T.J. Lang
45 Quinn Johnson
69 Jamon Meredith
94 Jarius Wynn
33 Brandon Underwood
59 Brad Jones
29 Anthony Smith
60 Duke Preston"There's a lot of interest in the draft. It's great. But quite frankly, most of the people that are commenting on it don't know anything about what they are talking about."--Ted ThompsonComment
-
I guess Hunter has 57, like dear old dad, but why not 47 for Clay III? It's got to some lame ass NFL rule (only RBs and Safeties can have 4X)Originally posted by HarveyWallbangers
"Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - WoodbuckComment
-
[quote="mraynrand"]
I guess Hunter has 57, like dear old dad, but why not 47 for Clay III? It's got to some lame ass NFL rule (only RBs and Safeties can have 4X)
[\quote]
20-49 belong to running backs and all defensive backs:
The argument I've heard before is that having numbers associated with specific positions makes it easier on the referees in keeping track of formations, etc. It would seem that's why they announce the number of a player with a number not normally given to a tight end reporting as an eligible receiver. I don't feel strongly about it either way. In any case, he can make a name fore himself with his own number. The story's told that Kirby Puckett wanted Willie Mays' number (24) when he came up to the Twins, but someone else had it (I think it was Tom Brunansky), so he took 34. and now that number is forever associated in Minnesota with Puckett (right down to the team address, which is 34 Kirby Puckett Place).Teamwork is what the Green Bay Packers were all about. They didn't do it for individual glory. They did it because they loved one another.
Vince LombardiComment
-
LOL me too! When Goodell came up with the pick, I kept saying to myself "dont start with an M, don't start with an M" ... I was waiting for that first sound out of his mouth.Originally posted by wist43
It's not that I would have been against it, it's more that I know BJ Raji is a much bigger need for this team and I honestly don't feel he has any bust potential. After I saw him push that lineman or fullback back into the RB against ND, I was sold 100%. We need a guy who can destroy the pocket even if he's not the one making the play. Disruption is key!Comment
-
I give this draft an A because of the needs it filled. It shored up our D-Line which was a huge problem last year. Hopefully we can get constant pressure like this with raji and pickett. I have no problem with the Matthews pick because someone brought up the good point of, imo were not in rebuilding mode any more. Ted has done a good job of filling the roster and were at the point where you take people who are going to work with your system. I think matthews was better than anyone we could have gotten.Comment
-
This is the part of the draft that is totally stupid. Give a draft a grade? How because the filled some needs? What a joke, I will grade it three years from now. Giving it an "A" because you recognize a name or two also doesn't make any sense.
I give all 32 teams an "Incomplete." More work to be done, like playing football at the NFL level.Comment
-
So it's not fair to call Al Davis a jackass based on this draft? (obviously we've been doing it awhile now already)Originally posted by Deputy NutzComment
-
There are so many things to call Al Davis a jackass for, why limit yourself?"Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg JenningsComment
Comment