Packers QB situation

[Uncle Buck]

9 hours ago, CWood21 said:

The argument being made by @Hunter2_1 was that a number of teams passed on picking Jordan Love as some sort of evidence that Love wasn't good.  I argued that 23 teams passed on Rodgers, so by that same sort of logic Rodgers wasn't very good.  LIS, people are parroting what a few talking heads are saying.

That's true.  I'd say Jordan Love deserves a chance to show the world what he can do before everybody makes a judgment on his future.  He could be a bust, but he also has a lot of physical talent and a couple of years of studying the game and practicing could go a long way in helping him reach his potential.  I'm sure not going to make any proclamations about him before seeing him play in a year or so.

[Hunter2_1]

14 hours ago, CWood21 said:

The argument being made by @Hunter2_1 was that a number of teams passed on picking Jordan Love as some sort of evidence that Love wasn't good.  I argued that 23 teams passed on Rodgers, so by that same sort of logic Rodgers wasn't very good.  LIS, people are parroting what a few talking heads are saying.

No it isn't! The argument was made that Love could have been picked up later. A packer fan named 6 or so teams that would have drafted him before that was possible (I don't think for a minute that he would have made it past 25 teams....like you've said...another strawman). Myself and @rocky_rams provided counter arguments for those teams. For NE's case, it made sense to trade out because we needed an entire squad overhaul - little point in picking a QB that early when he has nothing to throw to. 

You can infer what you want, but don't put words into my mouth - quote me where I've said he's a bad prospect on this thread. 

All I'm saying is for an excellent team like GB who are nearly there, it would have been nice to have something shiny in the first round to get them over the top.

I haven't once given an opinion on Love on this thread, as a player. I criticise the pick because why go all-in for 5 years when you can go all-in for now?

and P.S - I don't watching screaming head shows, I hate them.

Edited May 3, 2020 by Hunter2_1

[Hunter2_1]

I share similar opinions to these PACKERS fans;

 

"I'm just upset that we added not a single difference maker all offseason and now we can't."

 

"I guess losing 70-10 the first time wasn't good enough"

 

"Don't understand the pick when you've got one of the NFL's worst WR cores and MAJOR holes all over the team.  RT, ILB and our WR core are pretty easily some of the worst position groups in the NFL night now.  We've had a trash offseason where we've lost 5X more than we've3 added considering the back up caliber players that were added this offseason.

Nothing like seeing a team in the NFC Championship game last year scrap it and build for 3 o0r 4 years down the road"

 

"Two ILB were there for the taking. I'm sick"

 

"What I  do know is that we were in the NFC Championship game last year and haven't made any sort of improvements.  We just traded up for a guy who's not going to see the field for (BEST CASE) 2 years "

 

I don't think it's egregious to be disappointed by a profit-later pick when you're one of the best teams in the league, ready to go back to the SB. Anything that can help this season, maximising A-Rod's time (one of the best in the league). IF they know he's going to be traded, then fair enough - great pick. But he's not going anywhere just yet

 

 

Edited May 3, 2020 by Hunter2_1

[AlexGreen#20]

3 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

I share similar opinions to these PACKERS fans;

 

"I'm just upset that we added not a single difference maker all offseason and now we can't."

 

"I guess losing 70-10 the first time wasn't good enough"

 

"Don't understand the pick when you've got one of the NFL's worst WR cores and MAJOR holes all over the team.  RT, ILB and our WR core are pretty easily some of the worst position groups in the NFL night now.  We've had a trash offseason where we've lost 5X more than we've3 added considering the back up caliber players that were added this offseason.

Nothing like seeing a team in the NFC Championship game last year scrap it and build for 3 o0r 4 years down the road"

 

"Two ILB were there for the taking. I'm sick"

 

"What I  do know is that we were in the NFC Championship game last year and haven't made any sort of improvements.  We just traded up for a guy who's not going to see the field for (BEST CASE) 2 years "

 

I don't think it's egregious to be disappointed by a profit-later pick when you're one of the best teams in the league, ready to go back to the SB. Anything that can help this season, maximising A-Rod's time (one of the best in the league). IF they know he's going to be traded, then fair enough - great pick. But he's not going anywhere just yet

 

 

In fairness, Packer fans have the dumbest fanbase.

Are se sure the Patriots didn't get overly cute in trying to trade back under the assumption they could stilll get Love and pick up some more value? The local Packer beat writers were indicating it was a call from the Patriots looking to trade down that motivated the Packers to try and trade up. 

[Hunter2_1]

12 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

In fairness, Packer fans have the dumbest fanbase.

Are se sure the Patriots didn't get overly cute in trying to trade back under the assumption they could stilll get Love and pick up some more value? The local Packer beat writers were indicating it was a call from the Patriots looking to trade down that motivated the Packers to try and trade up. 

Possibly, I wouldn't rule that out. I do know that Dugger was one of 3 players they wanted from the second round pick though - so it's unlikely unless Love was one of the other two. 

[CWood21]

7 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

No it isn't! The argument was made that Love could have been picked up later. A packer fan named 6 or so teams that would have drafted him before that was possible (I don't think for a minute that he would have made it past 25 teams....like you've said...another strawman). Myself and @rocky_rams provided counter arguments for those teams. For NE's case, it made sense to trade out because we needed an entire squad overhaul - little point in picking a QB that early when he has nothing to throw to. 

Unless you have some sort of insider information, there's no way you can make that statement with any level of confidence.  Indianapolis could have traded up, Carolina could have as well, etc.  And as AG#20 suggested, could New England not have gotten cute that they thought they could trade down, extract some more draft picks, and still get their QB?  Gute mentioned that he felt the need to trade up for Jordan Love, because he believed teams were sniffing around.  And Bill Belichick already confirmed that it wasn't by design not to take a QB in the draft.

And as I mentioned, it should be a fireable offense to pass up on a QB that you think is a franchise QB.

7 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

All I'm saying is for an excellent team like GB who are nearly there, it would have been nice to have something shiny in the first round to get them over the top.

I haven't once given an opinion on Love on this thread, as a player. I criticise the pick because why go all-in for 5 years when you can go all-in for now?

Except they weren't that good.  Their Pythagorean wins was 9.8 I believe, and they were relatively healthy.  They're not the team that is knocking on the Super Bowl.  If passing up on a franchise QB and BPA in favor of over-drafting for need, I'm glad that you're not the GM.

[Hunter2_1]

.

Edited May 3, 2020 by Hunter2_1