remote controller 133 Posted April 18, 2006 Is there any way the Pack trades up, or are they way more likely to trade down, or just stay put. I like there spot this year, and they should receive multiple offers sitting there. I just don't personally trust thompson to make the right draft decisions. The perfect scenario for me would be Mario or AJ in the first and the best Offensive lineman available in the second, be that a tackle or a guard. The trading up scenario I was worried about was for one of the two qb's or Bush. They have a pile of money to sign a #1 pick or #2. (all three would be a big mistake) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swamp dog 0 Posted April 18, 2006 if you allow me... doesn't make sense for the packers to trade up--unless they have their eye on a specific qb, which they probably don't. brick or mario or hawk...all would be good and the packers are guaranteed one of them (most likely). too many holes to move up. staying put or moving down are the only logical options. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remote controller 133 Posted April 18, 2006 if you allow me... doesn't make sense for the packers to trade up--unless they have their eye on a specific qb, which they probably don't. brick or mario or hawk...all would be good and the packers are guaranteed one of them (most likely). too many holes to move up. staying put or moving down are the only logical options. Anytime, and you nailed it on the head. I am in the minority among Pack fans here though when it comes to Thompson's competance. The Qb slipping last season caused them to get off track, when they pulled the trigger, for there is no way they had a plan for that scenario. They never regained there draft balance. I don't want a QB this year. Let Rodgers sink or swim and take one of the three you mentioned.........PLEASE! Thanks for the response! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted April 18, 2006 Moving down is more likely than trading up. The Denver scenario is what I would find the most beneficial...but there was another one out there today with them moving down to 7th (with Oakland I think) and picking up a 3rd rounder...and still getting Hawk at that pick. I would be ecstatic with that. Anytime, and you nailed it on the head. I am in the minority among Pack fans here though when it comes to Thompson's competance. The Qb slipping last season caused them to get off track, when they pulled the trigger, for there is no way they had a plan for that scenario. They never regained there draft balance. I don't want a QB this year. Let Rodgers sink or swim and take one of the three you mentioned.........PLEASE!Thanks for the response! Never regained balance? How do you figure? By picking a safety in the 2nd that started for them and played well? Or a WR in the 3rd who was looking very good til the injury? Underwood is an unknown but not showing much... Poppinga contributed quite a bit on special teams...but his injury also hampered his development. They still think very highly of Coston and Montgomery. And Whitticker...while he was nothing to talk much about..started and was drafted in the 7th round. Overall, I think Ted had a pretty successful first draft with the Packers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michael Sieger 0 Posted April 18, 2006 The Qb slipping last season caused them to get off track, when they pulled the trigger, for there is no way they had a plan for that scenario. I don't claim to know any more than anyone else, but I am 100% certain the Packers had scouted Rodgers and were prepared for the possibility that they would get a shot at him at #24. I am certain they took him based on their grade for him as compared to other players available at that time, after considering potential trades and all other options. I am certain that they are fully prepared for any scenario that may arise during the two day draft. Chad Reuter does the best Packer Draft guide I've seen. It has some good info on this year's draft, but also includes detailed discussions about scouting, the combine, draft preparation and draft day itself. check it out! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remote controller 133 Posted April 18, 2006 Moving down is more likely than trading up. The Denver scenario is what I would find the most beneficial...but there was another one out there today with them moving down to 7th (with Oakland I think) and picking up a 3rd rounder...and still getting Hawk at that pick. I would be ecstatic with that. Never regained balance? How do you figure? By picking a safety in the 2nd that started for them and played well? Or a WR in the 3rd who was looking very good til the injury? Underwood is an unknown but not showing much... Poppinga contributed quite a bit on special teams...but his injury also hampered his development. They still think very highly of Coston and Montgomery. And Whitticker...while he was nothing to talk much about..started and was drafted in the 7th round. Overall, I think Ted had a pretty successful first draft with the Packers. I just feel that what fell to them wasn't planned for, and it kept a first round impact player off of the team. Then when the 2nd rolled around they still didn't pick up a player who was targeted. (or the whole first day for that matter) I have know proof of this, just a feeling that the day was much more hectic then it had to be, and they could have stuck to their plan, or individual draft scenarios, and done much better. Hell, I would have been very pleased with frye late, and felt they had gotten a Qb. who was more ready for the big leagues. This is all just my opinion of what I felt happened. Some things have worked out, but I would have much rather had one of the two guys the cowboys landed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted April 18, 2006 I just feel that what fell to them wasn't planned for, and it kept a first round impact player off of the team. Then when the 2nd rolled around they still didn't pick up a player who was targeted. (or the whole first day for that matter) I have know proof of this, just a feeling that the day was much more hectic then it had to be, and they could have stuck to their plan, or individual draft scenarios, and done much better. Hell, I would have been very pleased with frye late, and felt they had gotten a Qb. who was more ready for the big leagues. This is all just my opinion of what I felt happened. Some things have worked out, but I would have much rather had one of the two guys the cowboys landed. I think they did a little research with Rodgers...but did not think he would be there. But I do not think it threw them off track the rest of the draft. Sure it was hectic...and maybe they went off of other people's boards a bit, but who says they did not pick a player they were targeting? Seems to me like they had a very good draft (for who has actually come in and contributed and some who have done well). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remote controller 133 Posted April 18, 2006 I am real excited for this draft and feel they can really make waves from there spot. Here's hoping they nail one!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted April 18, 2006 I am real excited for this draft and feel they can really make waves from there spot. Here's hoping they nail one!! Me too...there are not too many scenarios out there where I would be disappointed with that pick right now. I think at #5...as long as he does not get crazy and go QB, Mario-Hawk-V.Davis...would all be great. I could even live with Huff there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GBFAVRE4 0 Posted April 19, 2006 I cannot pinpoint why exactly.....but I am very nervous about what they will do/get with this #5 pick.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
uubeee 0 Posted April 19, 2006 I would actually like them to package something together and take a shot at Reggie Bush (IF Houston is indeed looking elsewhere). I think the draft is deep enough at LB and OL to get the players we need and get the best player in the draft. Could still sign Arrington and Woodson. Won't happen, but that is what I want. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swamp dog 0 Posted April 19, 2006 I think they did a little research with Rodgers...but did not think he would be there. But I do not think it threw them off track the rest of the draft. Sure it was hectic...and maybe they went off of other people's boards a bit, but who says they did not pick a player they were targeting? Seems to me like they had a very good draft (for who has actually come in and contributed and some who have done well). ngata (sp)? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted April 19, 2006 I would actually like them to package something together and take a shot at Reggie Bush (IF Houston is indeed looking elsewhere). I think the draft is deep enough at LB and OL to get the players we need and get the best player in the draft. Could still sign Arrington and Woodson. Won't happen, but that is what I want. If they package enough together to get Bush though...they lose out on picks that could be adding to the OL and LBs. ngata (sp)? Ummm...was that a question referring to that post of mine? Or would I be upset with Ngata? Probably at 5 I would be...given the depth at DT and the much bigger needs elsewhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
