VOTE - Packer Rats MOCK PACKER PICK

[Bretsky]

If I'm not mistaken, it was right on the money with Bulaga. Didn't we get Raji right as well?

Last yr the poll picked Anthony Davis....OT

[Fritz]

I like Justin Houston and Cam Heyward. Both could conceivably be sitting there at #32.

[Bretsky]

I like Justin Houston and Cam Heyward. Both could conceivably be sitting there at #32.

I'm with you on Houston....but Hayward....classic boom or bust kind of guy IMO. Not sure I'd want that

[Lurker64]

I wouldn't be suprised if we jumped on Ingram if available. Grant's coming off injury, Starks has played like 6 games in 2 years, Jackson may not be back and Nance is unknown/PS type player. TT has always preached about BPA and that you don't know where your needs are so trying to fill them is futile.

Except that, exception truly exceptional running backs like Adrian Peterson, running back does not offer very good positional value in the first round. Almost without exception I would rather take a running back at the end of the second, third, or fourth round than in the first. Since Ingram is not a special talent, and a top RB is not necessary to succeed in the NFL I would much rather take a second or third tier guy in the later rounds and a guy at a harder position to fill than take a top tier running back and try to find a gem at the positions that have a higher degree of difficulty to pick.

Sign me up for LeShoure, Williams, Vereen, Harper, Hunter, Jones, or Rodgers in the second or later as dictated by your board, but I would never draft a non-special RB in the first round. So if I were in the draft room at 1265 Lombardi, I would argue vehemently for a guy like Ijalana over a guy like Ingram. In terms of "positional value" I would put RB behind QB, OT, OG, OC, WR, DE, NT, OLB, CB, and about even with S, TE, and ILB (though probably behind S.) And it's not like, in our mock, there's not considerable value at some of the more valuable positions available here at #32. Ijalana or Watkins are BPA here, it's just that people don't think they are since they watch Alabama football and not Villanova or Baylor football.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Except that, exception truly exceptional running backs like Adrian Peterson, running back does not offer very good positional value in the first round. Almost without exception I would rather take a running back at the end of the second, third, or fourth round than in the first. Since Ingram is not a special talent, and a top RB is not necessary to succeed in the NFL I would much rather take a second or third tier guy in the later rounds and a guy at a harder position to fill than take a top tier running back and try to find a gem at the positions that have a higher degree of difficulty to pick.

Sign me up for LeShoure, Williams, Vereen, Harper, Hunter, Jones, or Rodgers in the second or later as dictated by your board, but I would never draft a non-special RB in the first round. So if I were in the draft room at 1265 Lombardi, I would argue vehemently for a guy like Ijalana over a guy like Ingram. In terms of "positional value" I would put RB behind QB, OT, OG, OC, WR, DE, NT, OLB, CB, and about even with S, TE, and ILB (though probably behind S.) And it's not like, in our mock, there's not considerable value at some of the more valuable positions available here at #32. Ijalana or Watkins are BPA here, it's just that people don't think they are since they watch Alabama football and not Villanova or Baylor football.

Completely agree with this. Which is why I voted for Reed.

[Fred's Slacks]

Except that, exception truly exceptional running backs like Adrian Peterson, running back does not offer very good positional value in the first round. Almost without exception I would rather take a running back at the end of the second, third, or fourth round than in the first. Since Ingram is not a special talent, and a top RB is not necessary to succeed in the NFL I would much rather take a second or third tier guy in the later rounds and a guy at a harder position to fill than take a top tier running back and try to find a gem at the positions that have a higher degree of difficulty to pick.

Sign me up for LeShoure, Williams, Vereen, Harper, Hunter, Jones, or Rodgers in the second or later as dictated by your board, but I would never draft a non-special RB in the first round. So if I were in the draft room at 1265 Lombardi, I would argue vehemently for a guy like Ijalana over a guy like Ingram. In terms of "positional value" I would put RB behind QB, OT, OG, OC, WR, DE, NT, OLB, CB, and about even with S, TE, and ILB (though probably behind S.) And it's not like, in our mock, there's not considerable value at some of the more valuable positions available here at #32. Ijalana or Watkins are BPA here, it's just that people don't think they are since they watch Alabama football and not Villanova or Baylor football.

I can agree with that. Except that some may think that Ingram is special. Maybe not on par with AD or Chris Johnson but closer to a Frank Gore or MJD caliber back. That may be worth an R1. Its all probably moot anyway. I don't think we'll get him.

[swede]

I do think that we should have a head to head run-off between Brooks and Ingram.

We may have to apply the TT test: all football, good character, good for team chemistry, etc....

[gabe]

Ashleys out of town, but we talked about it today. I like Watkins the best here, Ashley like Jon Baldwin. We both agreed we don't see Ingram here nor do we want Ingram in this spot because James Starks and Ryan grant got it locked up. We agreed on Brooks reed who we hope with Kevin Greene, and clay Matthews to learn from he could cconceivably become clay Matthews lite. I think Ashley also did it because she thinks it would be cool for 3 of our starting linebackers to have long blonde hair. Haha

[Lurker64]

I do think that we should have a head to head run-off between Brooks and Ingram.

We may have to apply the TT test: all football, good character, good for team chemistry, etc....

So there's at least three people who have advocated for doing a runoff of some sort, do you think we could have one? I mean, asking for a majority instead of a plurality isn't ridiculous. At the time of this posting we have 14 for Ingram, 12 for Reed, and 11 for "other".

[Bretsky]

So there's at least three people who have advocated for doing a runoff of some sort, do you think we could have one? I mean, asking for a majority instead of a plurality isn't ridiculous. At the time of this posting we have 14 for Ingram, 12 for Reed, and 11 for "other".

Don't buy your campaign against Ingram; don't buy your argument that he is not a special talent and I'm a bit surprised others are not arguing on this as well. He's been an elite college RB his college career.

You may have convinced enough in here to flip their vote from Reed to Ingram if we have another runoff.

The last second round draft pick we made at RB was Brandon Jackson....a specialist. LeShoure won't be around when we make our pick in round two and IMO he's not in a class where you consider him in round one..

If Ingram is healthy, the reason he got the majority vote in a democracy type setting is they do view him as a spcial talent and the BPA on the board. Since RB is not a primary need, the only reason those 14 would have votes for him is they do think he's a special talent and a step above the rest of the class.

If you think he's special he's the BPA; if not you go for need since you are choosing from a tier below the elite talent at OL/LB/...........etc

[RashanGary]

Don't buy your campaign against Ingram; don't buy your argument that he is not a special talent and I'm a bit surprised others are not arguing on this as well. He's been an elite college RB his college career.

You may have convinced enough in here to flip their vote from Reed to Ingram if we have another runoff.

The last second round draft pick we made at RB was Brandon Jackson....a specialist. LeShoure won't be around when we make our pick in round two and IMO he's not in a class where you consider him in round one..

If Ingram is healthy, the reason he got the majority vote in a democracy type setting is they do view him as a spcial talent and the BPA on the board. Since RB is not a primary need, the only reason those 14 would have votes for him is they do think he's a special talent and a step above the rest of the class.

If you think he's special he's the BPA; if not you go for need since you are choosing from a tier below the elite talent at OL/LB/...........etc

Mark Ingram compares to Priest Holmes and Emmit Smith. Even Ladanian Tomlinson is more of that no nonsense type runner than he is a "big over power you" guy or a "quick, out maneuver you" guy. Obviously these are three great backs we're comparing him too, but that's his style. He's a complete RB. Ryan Grant has a similar style, but he can't break tackles. Ingram can. Most of the good RB's in the NFL run similar to Mark Ingram and Ingram is damn good at it. I'd take him at 32 and not think twice. I'd rather have a DL, OL or even OLB, but if the best player by far is a RB, then you have to take him.

[red]

i just got on this thread for the first time

sorry B, but ingram is not an elite talent. he's got the big name, the heisman and played for a big team, IMO he's more emmitt smith then barry sanders. any asshole with two legs could run through the holes that emmitt got. smith had one of the best o-lines of all time. barry had shit, but his elite talent got him through.

i see the same with ingram, not really fast, not really strong, not the quickest, but he played 3 years for one of if not the best team in college football over those years. put him on toledo's team, is he still a "dominate rb"? i don't think he would be, i think he would be a JAG

i don't see ingram giving us anything we don't already have on the roster

also, while we're at it, i'd like to mention just how fucked up the whole mock draft thing is. 2 or 3 weeks ago none of us on here had even heard of brooks reed. he had a decent combine, had an ok career, but nothing special. most experts that i saw had him as a third or fourth round pick, maybe a late second. then one of the big experts put two and two together. the guy looks and plays just like CMIII, the packers need another OLB, and TT isn't afraid to reach for a guy he likes. the expert stated that under kevin green, reed would have a bright future. within a day or two about half the mock drafts out there jumped on this bandwagon and had reed going to green bay. then a few days later a few of the mocks had the teams right in front of green bay taking him. now all of a sudden i see him as a ton 15 or 20 pick. i find this hillarious

99.95 percent of the people doing the mock drafts have no clue what the hell they are doing. they just look at everyone else's and try to tweek theres a little bit to make them look unique

[Lurker64]

I would explain why Ingram's not an elite talent, but red just did it. He wasn't even the best running back on his team last year. Ingram would be an incredibly average talent were he not playing behind a dominant line, and if we took him he would be just that.

[RashanGary]

I would explain why Ingram's not an elite talent, but red just did it. He wasn't even the best running back on his team last year. Ingram would be an incredibly average talent were he not playing behind a dominant line, and if we took him he would be just that.

Brian Cushing wasn't even the best LB on his team and he played for a powerhouse that can make guys look better, yet he turned out OK. Tom Brady wasn't even the starting QB at Michigan for much of his time there, yet he turned out OK.

If the greatest powerhouse in college football has a prospect better than Ingram, that's hardly damning.


But I see your point. I've heard him called the AJ Hawk of RB's. I'd be happy with him at 32. Better than taking Hawk at #5.

[Guiness]

also, while we're at it, i'd like to mention just how fucked up the whole mock draft thing is. 2 or 3 weeks ago none of us on here had even heard of brooks reed. he had a decent combine, had an ok career, but nothing special. most experts that i saw had him as a third or fourth round pick, maybe a late second. then one of the big experts put two and two together. the guy looks and plays just like CMIII, the packers need another OLB, and TT isn't afraid to reach for a guy he likes. the expert stated that under kevin green, reed would have a bright future. within a day or two about half the mock drafts out there jumped on this bandwagon and had reed going to green bay. then a few days later a few of the mocks had the teams right in front of green bay taking him. now all of a sudden i see him as a ton 15 or 20 pick. i find this hillarious

99.95 percent of the people doing the mock drafts have no clue what the hell they are doing. they just look at everyone else's and try to tweek theres a little bit to make them look unique

Agreed on the Reed thing. When I first heard his name, I was thinking 'good guy to take a flier on with our 3rd round pick.' Now, we likely won't get him with our second...although the 'media experts' are media experts for a reason. They'd all work for teams if they could.