Re: Moll
So I suppose you would have stayed away from Kampman who had only two years experience on the D-line, after having been a linebacker in high school and his first two years in college?
Much of drafting success is assessing potential beyond performance. Moll may not be a long term answer, but he hasn't been a complete waste either. He has more starts after 3 seasons than Marco Rivera had, and he has outlasted guys with better college resumes than his. Yes, this training camp will be crucial in his long term Packer future, and he has a real uphill fight to make the final roster. He's beyond the "lets try and develop him" stage that younger players fall into. Even if he is not around in September, and I doubt that he will be, he was worth a shot at that point of the draft. He served a purpose on a team that was woefully short of O-line talent at the time, if for no other reason than providing versatility as a so-so performer at multiple positions.
Originally posted by Packnut
Much of drafting success is assessing potential beyond performance. Moll may not be a long term answer, but he hasn't been a complete waste either. He has more starts after 3 seasons than Marco Rivera had, and he has outlasted guys with better college resumes than his. Yes, this training camp will be crucial in his long term Packer future, and he has a real uphill fight to make the final roster. He's beyond the "lets try and develop him" stage that younger players fall into. Even if he is not around in September, and I doubt that he will be, he was worth a shot at that point of the draft. He served a purpose on a team that was woefully short of O-line talent at the time, if for no other reason than providing versatility as a so-so performer at multiple positions.

Comment