TOP UNDRAFTED PLAYERS FOR TT TO SIGN WISHLIST

[Bretsky]

Jake Kirkpatrick, C, TCU
Jake Kirkpatrick won the Rimington award in 2010 which is awarded to the best center in division 1 football. Despite his prestigious award, he was not invited to the NFL Combine and he ended up not getting drafted. Nevertheless, don’t count out Kirkpatrick. He is a tough, sturdy center who could start for some team down the road. I think that someday down the road, he could potentially join the club of undrafted free agents who turn into pro bowlers. He did a very good job against 1st round draft pick Phil Taylor in the TCU vs Baylor game last year. The Cowboys are a team to look out for, but the Colts could give them a run for their money.

David Mims, OT, Virginia Union
David Mims was gaining a lot of traction during the draft process. He was labeled a sleeper by many scouts and his stock was on the rise. So it was surprising when he went undrafted on draft day. He comes in at 6 ft 8, 335 pounds with a huge 36 7/8 arm length. He can play tackle or guard. Mims will likely get plenty of attention when free agency opens and I expect him to go to a team like Detroit who showed interest in him before the draft.

[Bretsky]

For 5-techs, I like Brandon Bair out of Oregon. Doesn't have the arm-length that's ideal, but he's a big kid who's mature, consistent, and hard working.

Brandon Bair, DE, Oregon

Brandon Bair started off his collegiate career at tight end, but was quickly moved to the defensive line while redshirting in 2006. He picked up the tackle position quite well, but still failed to crack the starting lineup as an underclassman. It was in 2008 when Bair moved from the outside of the defensive line to the inside. He played quite well at both spots in a reserve role and was ready to take over a starting gig in 2009.
Bair was a staple on the defensive line during his junior campaign and led all Oregon linemen with 45 tackles. Bair was also a very productive player on special teams and proved to be in great condition since he took part in so many plays. In 2010 it was the Ducks offense that got all the credit, but Bair led a surprisingly productive defense. Bair totaled an impressive 47 tackles, including 16.0 tackles-for-loss and 3.0 sacks. Bair also used his long 6-6 frame to break up eight passes.

Bair would probably be a mid-round selection if he had a definitive position in the NFL. He has good quickness and strength, but he does not seem to have enough speed to play on the end in the NFL or enough strength to play at defensive tackle. He is also 26 years old and that has some teams backing away from a player who may need some time to turn into a productive end or tackle.

[Patler]

Any player who has confidence in himself, who truly believes he is an overlooked talent with NFL ability, would be a fool if he passed on an offer from the Packers. The Packers reputation and actual history for giving any player a chance has to be among the best in the league. Not uncommon at all for one or two undrafted rookies to make the team, and not just to take up a spot, but to actually contribute. Last year three made it and two played prominent roles.

Clearly their status as undrafted means nothing to TT and MM when evaluating them on the field. A player can't ask for anything more than that.

[vince]

Excellent point Patler. The Packers can find and develop raw talent with the best of them.

I wonder whether or how much that might be offset at this stage in the team's evolution by UDFA's (and/or their agents) also looking at depth charts to gauge which teams their guys will have the best chance to stick on. It seems like it may be more difficult for these guys to make the Packers' team in the next few years. I'm not sure the team has ever been deeper.

[Patler]

Excellent point Patler. The Packers can find and develop raw talent with the best of them.

I wonder whether or how much that might be offset at this stage in the team's evolution by UDFA's (and/or their agents) also looking at depth charts to gauge which teams their guys will have the best chance to stick on. It seems like it may be more difficult for these guys to make the Packers' team in the next few years. I'm not sure the team has ever been deeper.

As deep as the Packers are, except for one position, there are still openings for players with real potential anywhere else:

QB - need one now, two after Flynn leaves.
WR - need one for Jones, Swain is replaceable for anyone with ability. Draft probably supplied one.
O-line - always room for a good one when you keep 9 or 10.
RB - this could be the one depth chart that will be hard to crack. Someone would have to play themselves off the roster, or be hurt.
TE - lots of candidates, but no one with a proven track record behind Finley. A performer could stick very easily.

D-line - room for 1 or 2
Linebacker - like the o line, there is always room to keep a good one when you have that many
CB - still looking for this year's Shields. #4 and #5 spots are wide open.
safety - wide open for the #4 spot.

[pbmax]

As deep as the Packers are, except for one position, there are still openings for players with real potential anywhere else:

QB - need one now, two after Flynn leaves.
WR - need one for Jones, Swain is replaceable for anyone with ability. Draft probably supplied one.
O-line - always room for a good one when you keep 9 or 10.
RB - this could be the one depth chart that will be hard to crack. Someone would have to play themselves off the roster, or be hurt.
TE - lots of candidates, but no one with a proven track record behind Finley. A performer could stick very easily.

D-line - room for 1 or 2
Linebacker - like the o line, there is always room to keep a good one when you have that many
CB - still looking for this year's Shields. #4 and #5 spots are wide open.
safety - wide open for the #4 spot.

The overriding factor has to be the depth chart after the financial offer. While the player might have preferences, the agent knows where the most open slots exist. Several UnFAs have said the definitive factor was the depth chart (I think Shields mentioned this last year).

It would be intriguing to know whether past success with UnFAs would break ties when the offer was the same. I wonder where the Packers rank?

[vince]

I'm not sure I'd agree with all those "openings." There are certainly openings at the practice squad level, but I'd say the Packers have to be right up there at the top of the league in terms of talent across the board all the way through 53.

[Patler]

I'm not sure I'd agree with all those "openings." There are certainly openings at the practice squad level, but I'd say the Packers have to be right up there at the top of the league in terms of talent across the board all the way through 53.

Which position other than RB do you contest? The only other one is maybe WR, if Jones return. Swain is nothing special. Keeping Jones is not impossible, but unlikely.

There is easily an opening at any other position for a player with real potential. Now if he is looking for a squad that will be easy to make, GB isn't it. But if he is looking for a real chance to show what he has, GB is a good option for just about any player because he will be given a chance. I can find a "hole" in the 53 man depth chart just about anywhere.

Besides, an UDRFA should be happing with a PS spot if it is a team that has a history of truly developing and using those players.

[RashanGary]

TE would be a tough make. I know the Packers like Crabtree as a blocker / ST player. Finley and DJ Williams are sure locks. Quarless has some potential.


But yeah, just about every position has a wide open back end roster spot and the Packers are very open minded as far as not considering undrafted guys camp bodies.

[Patler]

TE would be a tough make. I know the Packers like Crabtree as a blocker / ST player. Finley and DJ Williams are sure locks. Quarless has some potential.


But yeah, just about every position has a wide open back end roster spot and the Packers are very open minded as far as not considering undrafted guys camp bodies.

The certainly have a bunch at TE, don't they?

There are things to like about each, and several certainly have potential; but I don't think they would shed a tear over letting any of them go for a guy with size, blocking ability and potential as a receiver. They like Crabtree, but a bigger Crabtree, or one with better potential as a receiver could displace Crabtree fairly easily, I think.

[vince]

I don't want to polarize my opinion too much, because I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying about a player with potential sticking on this team. It'll probably happen again this year. And I am certainly not arguing that Thomspon and Co. isn't or shouldn't work hard to scout and bring these guys in. But there isn't an undrafted guy who doesn't have holes in their "potential" that you can't point to.

QB - possibly 1, but they have a guy they're already grooming that they've said they like
WR - they have Chastin West that they're grooming who has a lot of potential
TE - they just drafted two guys who have more "potential" than any undrafted guy
D-Line - Good luck for any available udfa beating out Wilson, Wynn and Guy in terms of potential
LB - They just drafted an ILB and an OLB who likely have more potential than any udfa
CB - ditto on a draft pick (House), plus Gordy, who has flashed potential and has all the measurables.

I'm not saying any of these guys are infallible, but neither are any of the udfa's. Notwithstanding the Packers history in giving these guys a real opportunity, I'd bet there are teams with more opportunity for these guys at every position. Nonetheless, the Packers reputation here has to be a real selling point.

[Fritz]

I think if you're a QB you'd have to take a look at GB. Apparently MM can groom 'em, and Flynn will be gone soon enough. Who are you competing with? Graham Harrell?

[vince]

I'm sure they'll bring at least one in. My money's on Harrell to beat them out.

[Patler]

I don't want to polarize my opinion too much, because I don't necessarily disagree with what you're saying about a player with potential sticking on this team. It'll probably happen again this year. And I am certainly not arguing that Thomspon and Co. isn't or shouldn't work hard to scout and bring these guys in. But there isn't an undrafted guy who doesn't have holes in their "potential" that you can't point to.

QB - possibly 1, but they have a guy they're already grooming that they've said they like
WR - they have Chastin West that they're grooming who has a lot of potential
TE - they just drafted two guys who have more "potential" than any undrafted guy
D-Line - Good luck for any available udfa beating out Wilson, Wynn and Guy in terms of potential
LB - They just drafted an ILB and an OLB who likely have more potential than any udfa
CB - ditto on a draft pick (House), plus Gordy, who has flashed potential and has all the measurables.

I'm not saying any of these guys are infallible, but neither are any of the udfa's. Notwithstanding the Packers history in giving these guys a real opportunity, I'd bet there are teams with more opportunity for these guys at every position. Nonetheless, the Packers reputation here has to be a real selling point.

If I'm a QB, I would say "yes" to GB if they asked me to play for free. I would be more than happy to sit on the PS and wait for Flynn to leave.

If I'm a WR and didn't think I could beat out Chastin West, I would be polishing my academic resume, because any NFL paycheck would be a gift.

TEs? - That's the beauty of the Packers. They don't seem to care where you came from once you get to camp. Drafted, undrafted, big school, small school, it doesn't matter. PRODUCE on the field and they will give you the opportunity. Now if the player himself is intimidated by the "potential" of the drafted TEs, he needs to look for other work. The fact is, behind Finley no one has a spot for certain.

Wynn on the D-line? The Packers cut him last year and re-signed him when the injuries hit. His spot is ripe for taking.

Same for most of the others you mentioned. Sure the Packers have guys they are "grooming". That's is simply necessary. You train who you have. You encourage them. But, if another player shows a bit more potential I think the Packers would be more than happy to make a change.

If the FA is looking for a roster with no names penciled in the depth chart, he won't find it. There are always names, you just have to replace them. The Packers will give him an honest chance to do it. Shields came in behind Williams, Woodson, Lee, Underwood and Bush; with Harris on the mend. Maybe behind Bell, too who had played a fair amount the end of '09. All guys who were drafted and/or had experience. He leaped over all but the first two. Why couldn't an unheralded small school TE do the same? What is really ahead of him?

[vince]

No one argued there are any teams that don't have names on the depth chart. The point is some teams' roster depth is more difficult to replace than other teams'. The Packers are at or very near the top of that list right now.