PETER KING FROM SI-"THE FIRST ROUNDS GOOD,BAD, AND UGLY

[Lurker64]

What ever happened to that old saying - you can never have enough good defensive linemen.

I happen to think we did draft for an area of need.

I agree. I was very uncomfortable with the prospect of going into the season with the guys we have now, minus Allen. I wanted them to pick up somebody for the rotation, they just happened to pick up somebody who has the potential to be very good almost immediately.

DT wasn't a huge, pressing, glaring, gaudy need. But when we moved Jenkins outside, we created a need there. I mean, yes we had some DTs on the roster, but we had a bunch of WRs, a bunch of RBs, and a bunch of Safeties too. Having some guys doesn't mean a position isn't a need.

[Bretsky]

What ever happened to that old saying - you can never have enough good defensive linemen.

I happen to think we did draft for an area of need.

I agree. I was very uncomfortable with the prospect of going into the season with the guys we have now, minus Allen. I wanted them to pick up somebody for the rotation, they just happened to pick up somebody who has the potential to be very good almost immediately.

DT wasn't a huge, pressing, glaring, gaudy need. But when we moved Jenkins outside, we created a need there. I mean, yes we had some DTs on the roster, but we had a bunch of WRs, a bunch of RBs, and a bunch of Safeties too. Having some guys doesn't mean a position isn't a need.

We're doing a wonderful job rationalizing something none of us would have stated a few days ago. That's what we do; we're fans. By the beginning of the season the kool aide will be out and many will be predicting playoffs.

DL a need ? Compared to what ? It was robably the deepest position on the Green Bay Packers going into the draft. No we're not great there..but what other position are we deeper at with talent ?

Can never have too much talent at any position. So I guess that justifies needs at every position.

If you argue DL was a need then we clearly have need upgrades at every position on our team.

Listen, I'll wait and see on the pick.

But DL a need

[Bretsky]

RB, S, DE, DT, CB, WR

I would have wanted a S or RB first but any of the other 4 positions would have tied for priority #2.

I think QB was the one position I would not have taken early not matter what pretty much.

LB would have been tough but a special one like Willis; I still would have taken over a guy like Meachem.

Agree about Willis over Meachem; but part of that is because I'm not fond of Poppinga as a starter and consider Willis to be a better quality player than Meacham or the DL we drafted.

[HarveyWallbangers]

We're doing a wonderful job rationalizing something none of us would have stated a few days ago. That's what we do; we're fans. By the beginning of the season the kool aide will be out and many will be predicting playoffs.

DL a need ? Compared to what ? It was robably the deepest position on the Green Bay Packers going into the draft. No we're not great there..but what other position are we deeper at with talent ?

Actually, don't count me in on this because I've often said we have a solid DL, but could use another stud to turn this into a legit, good defense.

[Bretsky]

We're doing a wonderful job rationalizing something none of us would have stated a few days ago. That's what we do; we're fans. By the beginning of the season the kool aide will be out and many will be predicting playoffs.

DL a need ? Compared to what ? It was robably the deepest position on the Green Bay Packers going into the draft. No we're not great there..but what other position are we deeper at with talent ?

Actually, don't count me in on this because I've often said we have a solid DL, but could use another stud to turn this into a legit, good defense.

I'd completely agree that a stud DL can put this unit over the top, and I'm willing to take a wait and see approach with this pick.

But I'm at a loss for those who try to justify this pick by saying DL was a need; our DL was fine.

Hopefully this guy turns out to be a perrennial all pro and helps improve several players on the line as well

[RashanGary]

I just watched the Okoye vid vs the Harrell vid at yahoo and I'm trying to not be partial here but the Harrell looked much more powerfull and dominate.

Harrell was a giant amongst men and Okoye was just a man amongst men. Also, at 1:15 Harrell was tied up by a lineman and he shed the block perfectly. He just made the OL his bitch. Okoye didn't make any plays that impressed me as much as that.

Also, Harrell has a good instinct for the ball. He acctually gets picks at the line regularly. IF he can do that twice per year in the NFL that in itself could be the difference in those 2 games.

[RashanGary]

I was at JS for a while and I said many tiems that a stud DL would be perfect. I acctually preferred a stud DE but I was almost as warm with DT. I consider it *DL* the rarest and most important cog to a stud defense.

[Partial]

I just watched the Okoye vid vs the Harrell vid at yahoo and I'm trying to not be partial here but the Harrell looked much more powerfull and dominate.

Harrell was a giant amongst men and Okoye was just a man amongst men. Also, at 1:15 Harrell was tied up by a lineman and he shed the block perfectly. He just made the OL his bitch. Okoye didn't make any plays that impressed me as much as that.

Also, Harrell has a good instinct for the ball. He acctually gets picks at the line regularly. IF he can do that twice per year in the NFL that in itself could be the difference in those 2 games.

Okoye is gonna be a DE eventually and will become a very good one. If he was a little taller he'd be a prototype DE.

[Bretsky]

I just watched the Okoye vid vs the Harrell vid at yahoo and I'm trying to not be partial here but the Harrell looked much more powerfull and dominate.

Harrell was a giant amongst men and Okoye was just a man amongst men. Also, at 1:15 Harrell was tied up by a lineman and he shed the block perfectly. He just made the OL his bitch. Okoye didn't make any plays that impressed me as much as that.

Also, Harrell has a good instinct for the ball. He acctually gets picks at the line regularly. IF he can do that twice per year in the NFL that in itself could be the difference in those 2 games.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought I read in JS chat that TT had Harrell rated as the top DT. My guess is the Packer beat guy had interviewed TT and/or GB scouts. He also noted TT had very high grades on the two WR's who slipped to round two (Rice/Jarrett)

[Partial]

I just watched the Okoye vid vs the Harrell vid at yahoo and I'm trying to not be partial here but the Harrell looked much more powerfull and dominate.

Harrell was a giant amongst men and Okoye was just a man amongst men. Also, at 1:15 Harrell was tied up by a lineman and he shed the block perfectly. He just made the OL his bitch. Okoye didn't make any plays that impressed me as much as that.

Also, Harrell has a good instinct for the ball. He acctually gets picks at the line regularly. IF he can do that twice per year in the NFL that in itself could be the difference in those 2 games.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought I read in JS chat that TT had Harrell rated as the top DT. My guess is the Packer beat guy had interviewed TT and/or GB scouts. He also noted TT had very high grades on the two WR's who slipped to round two (Rice/Jarrett)

We're both bitter about that. What I like about this guy is that he is very good at getting off Blocks, where is Pickett is quite good at anchoring and taking on two guys. Hopefully, This guy lies somewhere in between the ultimate Tenn. Linemen known and John Henderson, one of the more recent, great linemen from Tenn.

[RashanGary]

Thanks for the info on Hall. I respect your opinion alot on Mich guys. I don't know though bull. Harris is slower than Hall and he's had a nice career. I think that speed thing can sometimes be overrated itself.

Lynch has size, speed, quickness, power...I like him alot. He reminds me a little of Ahman Green.

Glenn Dorsey is my first pick though. I like Dorsey more than any of them. I like Dorsey more than Branch but I havn't seen enough of either to be considered an expert.

I said this on the 31st of DEC. This was when I thought Dorsey was in the draft fold. He's a DT by the way. I was phyched about the oppertunity to add a stud DT. I don't expect anyone to waste their time checking up but if you do, here is the link


http://www2.jsonline.com/idealbb/view.asp?mode=viewtopic&topicID=41523&num=20&CatID =7&sessionID={DA890442-5E6D-4466-BA94-852774B9BDCF}&pageNo=1

[Partial]

Dorsey is gonna be a stud. Woulda been top 5.

[RashanGary]

Last man to wear No. 92, Reggie White's jersey. "That was for a reason," Angelo said. "Very talented guy. In the end, he could be the best DT."

Bears GM Angelo said that.

Because of the injury, he was off of my radar but I was always in favor of adding a stud to the DL. I wanted Glenn Dorsey but after seeing this guy, I'm kind of excited about him.

[NewsBruin]

Harrell looked much more powerfull and dominate.

It's a silly thing, but he looked more "dominant.' I've only seen that typo here on this board.

Also, Okoye is only 19, and may have to be "redshirted" to prep for the NFL. All that said, I like our new DT just fine.

[the_idle_threat]

I agree with Scott, Lurker, etc. that there was a need at Defensive Tackle. I would add that the need was at least as much as the need at Wide Receiver. Yes, I know ... but hear me out.

We have Pickett---who is solid but not a star---and then a bunch of former late round picks/undrafted free agents who put in great effort but leave us vulnerable against the run. The position is deep but not very talented.

Compare that to Wide Receiver, where we have a Pro Bowl veteran in Driver, one of the top receivers from last year's draft in Jennings, and a bunch of former late round picks/ undrafted free agents who put in great effort but don't get it done in the red zone. (I don't count Fergie or KoRo, because I don't think either will contribute much, if anything, in 2007.)

I agree that there is a need at receiver, because you really need 3 or even 4 who can contribute. But #1 and #2 are set with Driver and Jennings. Perhaps Jennings is no sure thing yet, but then do you honestly think any rookie receiver outside of CJ was going to come in and give us more right away in 2007? More than Jennings, who has a year of experience under his belt? Very doubtful. So we need a draft pick---or more likely one of those young guys already on the roster---to develop enough to contribute as a #3 receiver. I don't see that as a tall order at all.

At Defensive Tackle, you need 3 or 4 who can contribute in the rotation. Pickett is a good starter, but not a star. Williams contributes pash rush on third down, but he can't stop the run. Everyone else is just a guy. (I don't count Cullen Jenkins, because he will play Defensive End.) There was huge hole there. If Harrell is indeed a "top ten talent," he could fill that hole, and as a Defensive Tackle he shouldn't need a year or two of seasoning to be ready to contribute to the rotation.

Filling the talent hole in the middle of the defensive line could go a long way towards keeping blockers off of Hawk and Barnett, allowing them to flourish. If that happens, we could be looking at a dominant defense. How does a dominant defense NOT help Favre right away---far more than a rookie receiver who will probably not contribute much until 2008 or 2009?