You Make The Call: Hughes/Brown or Bulaga/Neal

[pbmax]

McGinn puts it plainly that he thinks Thompson was filling roster depth and picking for the future rather than applying the last patch of spackle to a Championship squad.

The normally reliable McGinn does acknowledge that Thompson didn't know Brown would be available all the way to the end of Round 2. However, he fails to acknowledge that Thompson flat disagreed with McGinn's scouts when presented with a choice of either Bulaga or Brown. And its also ironic that the same scouts who thought that Brown would be the better left tackle candidate, a position that competes only with pass rushing DE/OLB in rarity for drafters (both behind QB), didn't bother snatching up the sure-fire LT until the Saints did at the end of the 2nd round.

So we ask the Rats to weigh on on Bob's question? What would server the Packer's interest better? Hughes and Brown, where McGinn immediately promotes Hughes to starter over Jones and Poppinga? Or Bulaga and Neal, where each figures to be a situational player and insurance for injuries/jail terms?

[Gunakor]

Bulaga tips the scales all by himself here. Drafting Bulaga and trading our 2nd rounder away - netting nothing more than Bulaga for the first two rounds - would have been of greater value to the Packers than Hughes and Brown.

1) Charles Brown has a much higher chance to bust at this level than Bulaga does. Not that Bulaga is a sure thing either, but I think both his ceiling and his floor are higher than Brown's is.

2) McGinn has a much lower view of Brad Jones than I do. I think Jones could be a solid starter for us. I'm not 100% convinced that we need a new OLB to begin with.

[Fritz]

When I first saw McGinn's article I was chagrined because I thought that Hughes/Brown was a far better choice than Bulaga/Neal.

But as Scott pointed out as well on another thread, how is TT to know that Brown would've been available?

Also, as fans we might tend to pick the Hughes/Brown combo because they are both names that we've read about and know. But we don't scout these guys. TT and the GM's do. We make assumptions based on name recognition - more so than on scouting game tape.

[vince]

Hindsight's 20/20, and Brown apparently has a medical issue that was unpublicized, but I'd take Hughes and Brown over Bulaga and Neal right now. I think Brown has the tools and Hughes could be great. I guess it helps in my mind that Polian likes Hughes too.

[RashanGary]

We'll see how it all plays out. We'll know in 5 years who were the better players. Hughes is going to be a good pass rusher, but if Bulaga is the only good LT in that bunch and Neal is a 5 sack per year interior rusher, then we got the best of it, hands down, even with McGinn having the advantage of hindsight.

I like Matthews and Jones, so I'm not as big on the (we must have another OLB). You can get pass rush from lineman too. And Jones is better in coverage than any of hte OLB prospects we wanted. I'm much happier to have the guy I think is a solid LT

[green_bowl_packer]

Bulaga was in the top 10 of every mock, top 5 of every left tackle list, Brown wasn't.

The highest you ever saw Brown in the first was to us at 23 if at all, and none of us knew about the back issues he has (look what happened to the Bears with Chris Williams and his back).

You already have a 1st round do nothing yet with a bad back, don't dick around with anyone with a bad back. Especially when the thinking is were taking people who can help us right away.

Neal pick was a surprise, but I don't think anyone us were thinking big picture enough, at least initially. When the smoke cleared Neal pick makes total sense.

If Baluga pick makes sense, we will never talk about it again, because he'll be doing his job all like we thought he would and it will all have went down just like planned - he's plugged in and not worried about for 10 years.

[RashanGary]

Brad Jones is going to be 10 lbs bigger and much more comfortable in our defense this year. He's a pretty good player. I'd be perfectly happy with another Brad Jones OLB prospect and I think Ted can find him.



I'm much more worried about CB than I am OLB. And you can't jsut take a pass rush DE and throw him as an OLB. We have a real OLB and now extra pass rush in Mike Neal. IF it's pass rush you're worried about, there are other ways to get it than to weaken your coverage with a DE playing OLB (Hughes)

[Brohm]

Bulaga/Neal. You have to protect the investment in Rodgers and you want to do that with the biggest chance of success possible. The Pack survived the loss of Kampman to injury (and was successful with a young 7th rounder in Jones). QB goes down and we're screwed. I think we demonstrated well what a couple of "stumble-bums" at the Tackle position can do to your offense! Rodgers was lucky to get out alive

Similarly with Neal, he secures our DL now and in the future. Lets say Harrell cannot come back, or even does and is not effective. Throw in a Jolly possible suspension and Jenkins usual knicks and scrapes and it becomes a undermanned position real quick...just like Tackle last year.

As they say, game is won in the trenches!

BTW the draft is not even done yet! WTF McGinn

[Maxie the Taxi]

McGinn's got to write about something. "What if..." "What if..."

With me it comes down to "This is our team."

Hell, I wanted TT to draft Pouncey, Arenas and Shipley. "What if they turn out to be first year All-Pros? Looking back doesn't do a damn bit of good.

Having a night to sleep on it, I really like this draft. TT was picking late and come up with, argueably, one of the best two LT prospects and one of the best three FS prospects. Neal is a reach of sorts, but I love what I've read about the guy and my biggest concern going into this draft was coming away with an improved pass rush. Neal adds that. Plus, Burnett will be a great blitzing safety.

Moreover, the Vikes improved their up the middle run game in the draft, and Detroit got Best. The Bears picked up the Vikes other back of last year. Everything I read about Hughes is that he's, more or less, a pass rush phenom but weaker against the run. Neal, I read, is stout against the run.

I'm satisfied.

[vince]

I too am very happy with this draft so far. Going into the draft, getting Hughes and Brown was a dream scenario. However, the back issue with Brown obviously changes things.

Absolutely love Bulaga.

[swede]

Somebody wake up Tarlam. I'd like his opinion on the matter. He wanted a stud guard. Is he happy with the OT DE?

[vince]

I'd have taken Bulaga/Worilds over both, but the Steelers snatched him up a couple picks before us.

[Gunakor]

Tarlam wanted Pouncey, a center. I did too, and I think the Steelers are going to have the very best center in the NFL over the next 10-15 years.

But with Pouncey already off the board I'm extremely happy with the Bulaga pick.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Tarlam wanted Pouncey, a center. I did too, and I think the Steelers are going to have the very best center in the NFL over the next 10-15 years.

But with Pouncey already off the board I'm extremely happy with the Bulaga pick.

+1

[swede]

Tarlam wanted Pouncey, a center. I did too, and I think the Steelers are going to have the very best center in the NFL over the next 10-15 years.

But with Pouncey already off the board I'm extremely happy with the Bulaga pick.

+1

Well with things falling the way they did I'm glad we avoided the hard feelings of having this thread named "Pouncey vs Bulaga: Did we do the right thing?"