Jump to content

Hindsight -- Draft 2020


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Antoine Winfield comes here instead of Tampa and we're winning the Super Bowl, not them. 

Robert Hurt maybe alleviates the loss of Bakhtiari better.  Even if he is an interior guy here. 

Tee Higgins or Michael Pittman also help bridge that gap, but I won't judge not taking one of them because if we had, MVS doesn't have the year that he had.

200 less yards on 34 less receptions than Tee Higgins (same touchdowns).
200 more yards on 6 less receptions than Michael Pittman (MVS had 5 more touchdowns).

This is what the WR crowd will never accept nor understand.  If you draft and develop mid round receivers, you don't need first round receivers.  Other teams are just too impatient to do what we've done.  Gute essentially used a 4th, a 5th and a 6th plus undrafted money on 4 receivers counting on one of them becoming a good receiver.  He got two (MVS, Lazard).  Give me MVS/Lazard, Gary, Alexander, Savage any day of the week.

But not Love.

That close to a Super Bowl and don't ****ing tell me Love was the right pick.

If  you pick Love you better ****ing go all out to win a Super Bowl.

But nooooooo.  We doubled down in the second round and took Dillon.  Dillon to protect us for when we lose Jones.  Not an OL to help Jones be better while he's here, but Dillon to be better when Jones is gone. 

I don't care if every single player drafted within 32 picks of Love busts and Love turns into a Hall of Fame QB.  The NFL season is too long and life is too short to play for next year.  Gute should be ashamed of himself for the Love pick. 

Zero value whatsoever a year after reaching the Championship game and you can't tell me you're doing everything you can to win.

****ing lying SOB trying to protect his future instead of chasing rings.

I will never forgive Gute for  this draft.

Ever.

Even though there really wasn't a lot of anything great available when we picked Love.  That's fine.  So trade down.  Trade down and get Higgins.  Trade down and get Winfield.  Or just stay TF put. 

Anything - LITERALLY ANY PLAYER - helped us more this year than Love.

 

Wow. We get one dumbass defensive playcall away from the SB and it’s the GMs fault.
 

This thread is stupid.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Rodgers focus on fundamentals and have a resurgent year without the threat of replacement?

No rookie was going to move the needle on this team, this year.

Plus, drafting for year one impact is just absolutely moronic. Virtually no rookie is really ready year 1. They get snaps because their team didn't have better options. Show me a position where a rookie would have definitely gotten significant snaps. WR and ILB, maybe, and no player at those positions changes anything.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

That close to a Super Bowl and don't ****ing tell me Love was the right pick.

If  you pick Love you better ****ing go all out to win a Super Bowl.

But nooooooo.  We doubled down in the second round and took Dillon.  Dillon to protect us for when we lose Jones.  Not an OL to help Jones be better while he's here, but Dillon to be better when Jones is gone. 

I don't care if every single player drafted within 32 picks of Love busts and Love turns into a Hall of Fame QB.  The NFL season is too long and life is too short to play for next year.  Gute should be ashamed of himself for the Love pick. 

Zero value whatsoever a year after reaching the Championship game and you can't tell me you're doing everything you can to win.

****ing lying SOB trying to protect his future instead of chasing rings.

I will never forgive Gute for  this draft.

Ever.

Even though there really wasn't a lot of anything great available when we picked Love.  That's fine.  So trade down.  Trade down and get Higgins.  Trade down and get Winfield.  Or just stay TF put. 

Anything - LITERALLY ANY PLAYER - helped us more this year than Love.

 

I do like @Outpost31 posts a lot. Plenty of push-the-boat-out opinions and always worth a read. While I disagree with this part of his post I do appreciate the passion he displays when he makes a point. I agree Love never helped us at all in 2020, but he was never meant to. Have you ever bought a lottery ticket ? That is what Love is. A good QB  is so important to a teams success that Green Bay decided to roll the dice for the future. The Packers could have gone a different way that was more geared to immediate benefit, but as they have done so many times, they kept an eye on the future, post Rodgers (and remember, back before the season started many wondered if the best of Rodgers was gone, all in the past).

One of the strengths of the Packers is that for decades they have resisted going all-in now and balanced the current with the future needs and cap health. It is what has kept them competitive almost continuously, for 30 years.

So for me, even if at my age I am less dramatic than Outpost (who I believe is less than half my age), I am absolutely fine with the Love pick. Even if he doesn't pan out, they bought the lottery ticket to get a chance at developing someone they liked, someone who might (or might not) be a solid follow-on to two back-to-back HOF QBs. Even if the pick fails Gute has nothing to be ashamed of when he picked Love, nothing at all.The Packers looked to the future when they took a chance on Rashan Gary in 2019, knowing he wouldn't do much in his rookie year. On draft day he was almost pure potential and high-quality athletic ability. That pick now looks like it might pay off handsomely, if his second year is anything to go by. Here's hoping Love turns out well, also.

If you want an all-in team.................don't choose to support the Packers, try backing Washington, the Falcons, or given their current cap, the Saints. Even the Vikings are a better bet for that, they have been the post-draft media darlings many times, and disappointed just as often.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

What good have quarterbacks done the Packers?

Since 1998, the Packers have the exact same number of Super Bowl appearances as the Bears.  Granted the Packers won one, but the fact remains.  The worst team in the NFL at the QB position has the same number of Super Bowl appearances as the best since 1998.

The Giants have twice the Super Bowl wins since 1997 as the Packers.

It’s not about the QB and it never was. It’s about value to cap space.  By taking Love and sitting him, you are getting rid of the one thing that makes a first round QB worth a first round pick, which is his rookie contract.

Literally the only reason Rodgers won a Super Bowl was because it was an uncapped year.  People tend to forget that.  We wasted Aaron’s rookie contract and WE GOT LUCKY WITH AN UNCAPPED YEAR.

Now we are wasting Love’s rookie contract.

Let’s play this out.  Rodgers plays this year.  Love has a growing pains year as his first year as a starter.  You now have a one year window before you have to extend him because if you play him on the 5th year option, well... If he’s good he won’t play that fifth year without a new deal.

So congratulations, Gute.  You’ve just wasted the best part of a first round QB.

 

 

 

 

 

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

No rookie was going to move the needle on this team, this year.

If people want to defend the Love pick, that's fine as there are clearly two sides to the argument there and both are fair. 

But the bolded statement needs to stop. It has become the number 1 go-to response by people on this board defending the Love pick and it's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. For one, it's flat wrong when you talk about a guy like Winfield and impact he made. Tampa probably doesn't go to the SB without him (see Jared Cook fumble). Second, no one, not me, not anyone truly knows what kind of impact a 1st round rookie who actually could see the field would have had on the 2020 team. Maybe a rookie WR catches a pass on 3rd and 10 against Tampa and we end up winning the game. Maybe a rookie WR catches the 2pt conversion that EQ dropped. Maybe Winfield or another DB makes the plays Redmond botched all over the field. Maybe a rookie DL makes one Howard Green type play and forces an incompletion on one of the Tampa's TD drives. I could go on. 

If people want to defend the Love pick, there are other arguments. This isn't one. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure how suggesting a rookie wasn't going to move the needle for GB is dumber than suggesting TB wouldn't have made the SB without Winfield.  Both statements are dumb, and one is no less dumb than the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

What good have quarterbacks done the Packers?

Since 1998, the Packers have the exact same number of Super Bowl appearances as the Bears.  Granted the Packers won one, but the fact remains.  The worst team in the NFL at the QB position has the same number of Super Bowl appearances as the best since 1998.

The Giants have twice the Super Bowl wins since 1997 as the Packers.

It’s not about the QB and it never was. It’s about value to cap space.  By taking Love and sitting him, you are getting rid of the one thing that makes a first round QB worth a first round pick, which is his rookie contract.

This implies you'd RATHER have a poor QB.................and it really is pointless to argue Superbowls.
They are just one point in time, while being a fan is about following the Packers all the time. What a good QB does is offer a better chance to stay competitive over the years, even when what he is surrounded by is less than ideal (see the length of McCarthy's tenure with Favre and AR as the QBs). A QB makes more difference to the performance of a team than any other guy on the team. The simple reason a good QBs wages is so much higher than anyone else, is because he affects things more than anyone else.

As for getting good bang for your buck with the maximum number of players, well that's GMing 101. Where we differ is how important the QB is and whether letting a QB sit for a couple of years is wasting him because he is relatively cheap then, or teaching him to be better than he could otherwise be. I believe more in the latter (especially with picks that are not top 10), you the former.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it's the defense or bust.

I don't care if Barty Smith has to be RB#2. I don't care if Perry Kemp has to be WR#2. I don't care if Marshall Newhouse has to be the RT. I don't care how many resources have already been thrown on the defensive side already. I don't care if the answer is Joe Barry. I don't care if the answer is that Savage becomes Ronnie Lott and Gary becomes Lawrence Taylor. Come playoff time, opposing offenses have no problem getting however many points they need to win, and it always looks easy. Enough already

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

If people want to defend the Love pick, that's fine as there are clearly two sides to the argument there and both are fair. 

But the bolded statement needs to stop. It has become the number 1 go-to response by people on this board defending the Love pick and it's one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. For one, it's flat wrong when you talk about a guy like Winfield and impact he made. Tampa probably doesn't go to the SB without him (see Jared Cook fumble). Second, no one, not me, not anyone truly knows what kind of impact a 1st round rookie who actually could see the field would have had on the 2020 team. Maybe a rookie WR catches a pass on 3rd and 10 against Tampa and we end up winning the game. Maybe a rookie WR catches the 2pt conversion that EQ dropped. Maybe Winfield or another DB makes the plays Redmond botched all over the field. Maybe a rookie DL makes one Howard Green type play and forces an incompletion on one of the Tampa's TD drives. I could go on. 

If people want to defend the Love pick, there are other arguments. This isn't one. 

Ok sure.  Do you know for a fact that the Love pick isn’t directly linked to the renaissance season Rodgers had?  Because frankly, Rodgers had been a middle of the road QB since 2017 and THAT was a big factor in the Love pick.

I know correlation doesn’t imply causation, but to me there was enough change in Rodgers play, attitude and focus to give credence to the theory that draft night 2020 was a MASSIVE wake up call for him.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, spilltray said:

Does Rodgers focus on fundamentals and have a resurgent year without the threat of replacement?

No rookie was going to move the needle on this team, this year.

Plus, drafting for year one impact is just absolutely moronic. Virtually no rookie is really ready year 1. They get snaps because their team didn't have better options. Show me a position where a rookie would have definitely gotten significant snaps. WR and ILB, maybe, and no player at those positions changes anything.

And this past spring/summer we had no mini camps or preseason games.  Rookies this past season are further behind than in previous years.

Edited by Pugger
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

Antoine Winfield comes here instead of Tampa and we're winning the Super Bowl, not them. 

Robert Hurt maybe alleviates the loss of Bakhtiari better.  Even if he is an interior guy here. 

Tee Higgins or Michael Pittman also help bridge that gap, but I won't judge not taking one of them because if we had, MVS doesn't have the year that he had.

200 less yards on 34 less receptions than Tee Higgins (same touchdowns).
200 more yards on 6 less receptions than Michael Pittman (MVS had 5 more touchdowns).

This is what the WR crowd will never accept nor understand.  If you draft and develop mid round receivers, you don't need first round receivers.  Other teams are just too impatient to do what we've done.  Gute essentially used a 4th, a 5th and a 6th plus undrafted money on 4 receivers counting on one of them becoming a good receiver.  He got two (MVS, Lazard).  Give me MVS/Lazard, Gary, Alexander, Savage any day of the week.

But not Love.

That close to a Super Bowl and don't ****ing tell me Love was the right pick.

If  you pick Love you better ****ing go all out to win a Super Bowl.

But nooooooo.  We doubled down in the second round and took Dillon.  Dillon to protect us for when we lose Jones.  Not an OL to help Jones be better while he's here, but Dillon to be better when Jones is gone. 

I don't care if every single player drafted within 32 picks of Love busts and Love turns into a Hall of Fame QB.  The NFL season is too long and life is too short to play for next year.  Gute should be ashamed of himself for the Love pick. 

Zero value whatsoever a year after reaching the Championship game and you can't tell me you're doing everything you can to win.

****ing lying SOB trying to protect his future instead of chasing rings.

I will never forgive Gute for  this draft.

Ever.

Even though there really wasn't a lot of anything great available when we picked Love.  That's fine.  So trade down.  Trade down and get Higgins.  Trade down and get Winfield.  Or just stay TF put. 

Anything - LITERALLY ANY PLAYER - helped us more this year than Love.

 

I think your off base here. Unless there was someone who could get pressure up the middle every down against Brady who would have changed that game? I don’t think any receiver would have seen the field in front of MVS.  What OT in the draft would have replaced arguably the best LT in the NFL? What rookie would have changed fluke plays or bad play calls?

Those players that may have made a difference weren’t available to us where we picked. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The hypothetical for me would be less about the impact that player would have made last year and more so the impact a 1st round pick would make in their second year of play. Sure, we will draft a first rounder this year but that player could still take the year to develop while we are contending.  

While I wasn't super excited about the pick and obviously in hindsight it would of been nice to grab another player with how well Rodgers played. I do think people forget that at the time, Rodgers was coming off a couple years that weren't great and it was fair for our FO to look at options given his age as well. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Victor1124 said:

The hypothetical for me would be less about the impact that player would have made last year and more so the impact a 1st round pick would make in their second year of play. Sure, we will draft a first rounder this year but that player could still take the year to develop while we are contending.  

While I wasn't super excited about the pick and obviously in hindsight it would of been nice to grab another player with how well Rodgers played. I do think people forget that at the time, Rodgers was coming off a couple years that weren't great and it was fair for our FO to look at options given his age as well. 

 

Excellent points. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2021 at 5:32 PM, OneTwoSixFive said:

This implies you'd RATHER have a poor QB.................and it really is pointless to argue Superbowls.
They are just one point in time, while being a fan is about following the Packers all the time. What a good QB does is offer a better chance to stay competitive over the years, even when what he is surrounded by is less than ideal (see the length of McCarthy's tenure with Favre and AR as the QBs). A QB makes more difference to the performance of a team than any other guy on the team. The simple reason a good QBs wages is so much higher than anyone else, is because he affects things more than anyone else.

As for getting good bang for your buck with the maximum number of players, well that's GMing 101. Where we differ is how important the QB is and whether letting a QB sit for a couple of years is wasting him because he is relatively cheap then, or teaching him to be better than he could otherwise be. I believe more in the latter (especially with picks that are not top 10), you the former.

I don't think people are going to be convinced until post HOF QBs so its probably not worth trying to convince them.   10 years of mediocre QB and 10 years of watching the playoffs on TV after the season was finished before December and they will probably figure it out.  Its grass is always greener when you have had 20 years of elite but expensive QB play then you want something different.  When they have had 20 years of mediocre QB its pretty likely they will be desperate to see a good QB no matter how much it costs. 

I suspect any fans of teams with mediocre QBs will be pretty amused at Outpost claiming we aren't getting value for money from Rodgers. Pretty much the definition of 'first world problems'.

Re value.  We finished 13-3 had Bakh not done his ACL we could have made the super bowl. Either way its pretty obvious the value of the roster, QB and so on was pretty much spot on.  

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Rodgers would have had another year like the previous 2 or 3, he probably would have been traded to another team already and Love would be our starting QB next year.  Nobody here, especially those of you whining about the Love pick, thought Rodgers would have an MVP year this year, and if you say you did, you're straight up lying.

  • Like 2
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...