Ok, Who is the One Top Rated Guy You DON"T Want?

[Zool]

Putting the other team on their heels by getting a lead with big plays from the offense is one strategy. Another is creating a formidable pass rush. Maybe shorter fields for a Rodgers-led offense is better option than asking him to create big plays all the time.

Agreed. If a GM thinks Vea is the second coming of Vince Wilfork, you take him.

[gbgary]

why in the world would they draft a running back with a high draft pick?

think about the title of the thread. it's what you don't want. that's what he doesn't want.

[mraynrand]

think about the title of the thread. it's what you don't want. that's what he doesn't want.

Maybe, it's always difficult to interpret Woodstock's rambling, but it sure looked like he argued himself into wanting a running back:

I don't want NO 14 used on either Davenport or Landry. I don't want NO. 14 to be used 'on smaller' and WR Calvin Ridley or CB Joshua Jackson.

It takes a lot of work and reading to arrive at such thinking. Sure it's great to have a higher Draft Pic but really !? Isn't there a sharp drop off in talent (Grade) after the first 10 -12 picks, and not targeting QB Prospect Lamar Jackson even as Draft Trade bait? Maybe Lamar Jackson is the Packers Guy because after Aaron Rodgers the Packers have little as a backup QB!?

It will be better to trade down from NO. 14 and target an upgrade possibly for the RHS of the OL and even possible grab a Running Back in a RB heavy Draft. The Packers aren't going to be ready this Season nor likely in 2019. An additional Round two late or Round Three Pick might work out well!?

[gbgary]

Maybe, it's always difficult to interpret Woodstock's rambling, but it sure looked like he argued himself into wanting a running back:

ok. lol

[bobblehead]

I don't think I want Davenport or Landry at 14. Though Bill Polian just about wet himself describing Davenport on ESPN an hour ago.

I agree on Davenport. He is a freak athlete, but no one knows if that can translate to the pro game or how long his learning curve might take. Taking a guy like that at 14 isn't really ideal.

I think there are 10 guys in tier one and maybe 15 more in tier 2. If none of the 10 slide you could see a trade down.

[bobblehead]

Vita Vea. Fine player, but he'd just be a rotational player with the strength of the defensive line.

If he is available and by far bpa you take him. Wilkerson is on a one year deal. If he is awesome and Vea pans out you can always tag him(wilkerson) and/or get picks even if its comp picks. I think if we learned nothing else its that every rosters strength can look weak within 2 years. BPA is the only way to draft for long term success.

[Bretsky]

I don't want Josh Jackson the CB from Iowa

[gbgary]

I agree on Davenport. He is a freak athlete, but no one knows if that can translate to the pro game or how long his learning curve might take. Taking a guy like that at 14 isn't really ideal.

I think there are 10 guys in tier one and maybe 15 more in tier 2. If none of the 10 slide you could see a trade down.

as someone said, we already have 12 picks...we don't need more. i don't want to see any trading down...only up.

[texaspackerbacker]

Don't buy it. Davenport will take time to develop but what I have seen and heard is the guy just wants to get better and better. The guy is sort of a freak athletically

Finally somebody who ain't against my guy, Davenport.

I don't want any WR or D Lineman or QB or RB at 14, so I'll say Saquan Barkley, who I think might just be a bust even for a team that does need an RB.

[woodbuck27]

why in the world would they draft a running back with a high draft pick?

I didn't post advice to draft a RB in Round ONE. I want the Packers to trade down from NO. 14 and draft the BPA and an upgrade to the OL.

Here it is:

" It will be better to trade down from NO. 14 and target an upgrade possibly for the RHS of the OL and **even (Edit) possibly grab a Running Back ** in a RB heavy Draft. " woodbuck27

** with that extra Pick acquired after trading down.

[Zool]

as someone said, we already have 12 picks...we don't need more. i don't want to see any trading down...only up.

I also like that if the Packers don't like any players at 14, there's automatically a team that does.

[woodbuck27]

If he is available and by far bpa you take him. Wilkerson is on a one year deal. If he is awesome and Vea pans out you can always tag him(wilkerson) and/or get picks even if its comp picks. I think if we learned nothing else its that every rosters strength can look weak within 2 years. BPA is the only way to draft for long term success.

How many Packers are you thinking .... 'tagging' in 2019?

Are you assuming that Aaron Rodgers Contract Extension is going to get done this Season?

[woodbuck27]

I don't want Josh Jackson the CB from Iowa

I don't want him or another 'small' and WR Calvin Ridley.

We have to keep Aaron Rodgers on his feet.

[gbgary]

I also like that if the Packers don't like any players at 14, there's automatically a team that does.

with all the qb's in the mix i can't imagine there'd be someone at 14 they wouldn't want...but it there's someone that they want more, that they can move up for, they should do it.

[hoosier]

If he is available and by far bpa you take him. Wilkerson is on a one year deal. If he is awesome and Vea pans out you can always tag him(wilkerson) and/or get picks even if its comp picks. I think if we learned nothing else its that every rosters strength can look weak within 2 years. BPA is the only way to draft for long term success.

Good point. How bout within three months? Remember all the JSO talk in summer 2016 about how the secondary was the strength of the Packer defense.