Jump to content

2021 GB Roster & Free Agents


Recommended Posts

Just now, Packerraymond said:

You're stating facts the same was Bears fans were stating facts after 2019 to say Trubisky was the best QB in the North.

no, i'm not at all

stop this madness

this is nonsense

my facts are literal and verifiable facts

don't fall to this level

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

Fact: internet draftniks have a TINY fraction of information available to them relative to NFL decision makers

Fact: nobody knows where Rodgers ranked on any team's board other than he was in GBs top 24

Fact: nobody knows where Love ranked on any team's board other than he was in GBs top 26

Conclusion: the NFL market proved the two QBs were held in similar value indicating they were similarly ranked prospects.

Fact: Anyone who says otherwise doesn't have a handle on the actual facts.

this part is 100% true.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, skibrett15 said:

This is a self-defeating argument.  It undermines your point by building upon flawed logic.  Simply saying nothing  or making unsubstantiated claims would be a better argument than basing your argument on something you know to be demonstrably false.

it's a perfect retort to which I retorted

I don't need to believe it any further than in the context in which I presented it as a counter-argument

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, incognito_man said:

I, for one, am VERY enticed at the idea of moving forward with a skilled 23 year old QB, incredible draft capital, and significant cap space in 2022. Our Front Office would have a LOT of resources to build an incredible roster around Love, that could open a sizable window for success if he's even Jared Goff-level good.

This window will never be bigger than it would be with Rodgers unless Love is actually a russell wilson level qb or better.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

I don't care about draftnik ranks, they went in similar spots of the draft. The ACTUAL market >>> Walter Football projections in February.

Literally just had this argument on FB. I don't care that some publications or mock drafts had him going #1. He lasted to #24. That tells me he wasnt that highly regarded. 

 

RG3 was, and he went #2.

Darnold was, and he went #3.

Carson Wentz was, and he went #2.

 

Guys that were actually in the conversation for #1 had teams trading up to acquire them. If Rodgers was actually being considered for #1, he would've went Top 5, minimum Top 10. He didn't. That tells me all I need to know

 

Edit: I'm caught up on the whole conversation now. I don't agree or disagree that they're similar prospects. Haven't thought that much about it. Just thought the argument was centered around "Rodgers was projected #1 and Love wasn't, so the situations aren't comparable"

Edited by smetana34
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, incognito_man said:

no, i'm not at all

stop this madness

this is nonsense

my facts are literal and verifiable facts

don't fall to this level

So were the facts that Trubisky had a statistically better season that year. 

Just because "internet draftniks" aren't all in NFL circles and Rodgers fell to 24 vs Love falling to 26 does not make them the same caliber of prospect. You're stating facts that don't actually paint an accurate picture. Either that or you clearly didn't study Rodgers at Cal. If he was the first Tedford QB and not another in a long line of failures, he would've been #1, no questions asked.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

Rodgers fell to 24 vs Love falling to 26 does not make them the same caliber of prospect.

It literally does. And it literally uses the best available information to support it. To suggest otherwise is to suggest that the suggester of the different reasoning places his/her opinion above that of 32 collective NFL franchises.

Efficient market hypothesis

Edited by incognito_man
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, smetana34 said:

Literally just had this argument on FB. I don't care that some publications or mock drafts had him going #1. He lasted to #24. That tells me he wasnt that highly regarded. 

 

RG3 was, and he went #2.

Darnold was, and he went #3.

Carson Wentz was, and he went #2.

 

Guys that were actually in the conversation for #1 had teams trading up to acquire them. If Rodgers was actually being considered for #1, he would've went Top 5, minimum Top 10. He didn't. That tells me all I need to know

Exactly. The NFL GDP places it roughly in the middle of all COUNTRIES in the world. It is a market all by itself. It attracts sooo much money and influence it is obviously an efficient market.

It makes me so sad when people think they individually have a superior understanding that what the market actually indicated. No individual is going to consistently beat this market; therefore I trust no individual opinion over market results (especially when hindsight is involved).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, incognito_man said:

It literally does. And it literally uses the best available information to support it.

but your idea is to trade current Rodgers for Rodgers the prospect.  You want to take the exception and trade it for the normal plus picks and cap space in 2 years

So I guess the idea is to take a shot at being the 2013 seahawks if you hit on the QB, rather than trying to be a better version of the 2011 Giants, 2015 broncos, etc.

Your idea is to give up an actual shot now, to have a chance at a shot later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, incognito_man said:

It literally does. And it literally uses the best available information to support it.

No it literally doesn't lol. What if Love was the 26th player on the Packers board and Rodgers was the 2nd?

What if Rodgers was a 10 top player on all 32 boards, but teams didn't need a QB so they passed? 

You have two numbers that are the position a player was drafted, nothing to do with their grade. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

No it literally doesn't lol. What if Love was the 26th player on the Packers board and Rodgers was the 2nd?

What if Rodgers was a 10 top player on all 32 boards, but teams didn't need a QB so they passed? 

You have two numbers that are the position a player was drafted, nothing to do with their grade. 

I get the feeling that the emboldened part was why Rodgers fell.

 

Honestly, the comparison and some of the points of the discussion are almost to the level of where you would wonder if someone was trying to cause drama here TBH - not that I am saying that is the case here...

I only mention it because anyone who put the collegiate careers of both QB's would see that one QB played in a Power 5 conference with one of the best collegiate dynasties ever and almost beat them with an ok RB and JAGS. The other played in a non-Power 5 conference and had a subpar senior season after multiple starters around him graduated. One QB was consistently pegged as a top-10 player based on his production; the other rose up the draft charts towards the draft very quickly based solely on athletic traits and a few big plays that reflected those gifts.

 

To put it in perspective: Tom Brady was a productive college QB who only had a QB battle because he wasn't a 5-star QB like his teammate, but achieved and produced anyway. He came into the league as a 6th round pick with horrible athleticism, but he "threw a catchable ball" and found ways to achieve despite his limitations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

but your idea is to trade current Rodgers for Rodgers the prospect.  You want to take the exception and trade it for the normal plus picks and cap space in 2 years

So I guess the idea is to take a shot at being the 2013 seahawks if you hit on the QB, rather than trying to be a better version of the 2011 Giants, 2015 broncos, etc.

Your idea is to give up an actual shot now, to have a chance at a shot later.

Love will be a pro by the end of the season with two full years of staff evaluation. Plenty of time to make a FAR more educated guess than Love the Utah St. prospect.

My idea is to give up a diminished shot with an overpriced, aging QB that historically has severely limited chance of ultimate success for an improved shot with a ridiculously high value (cheap) QB for 3+ years (depending on contract extension timeline), a ridiculous draft capital infusion, and an extra $30million of cap space to pepper the surrounding cast with talent.

It's a no-brainer from a purely field-product POV. It gets murky when the soft-science gets factored in (public perception, product sales, etc.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

No it literally doesn't lol. What if Love was the 26th player on the Packers board and Rodgers was the 2nd?

What if Rodgers was a 10 top player on all 32 boards, but teams didn't need a QB so they passed? 

You have two numbers that are the position a player was drafted, nothing to do with their grade. 

QB is the most valuable position. It, more than anything, will demonstrate the efficiency of the market. The NFL collectively valued Rodgers the prospect and Love the prospect nearly identically. 

It's all I need to know. Every individual opinion to the contrary is hogwash.

It's why I'll never buy an individual stock, either. I trust no one who thinks they are smarter than billion/trillion dollar systems. It's insanity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...