Packers First Round - Jordan Love - POLL ADDED

Post #381 » by **ReasonablySober** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:50 pm

If the Packers come away with an impact WR tonight do people STFU about last night?

James1980 · Post #382 » by **James1980** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:51 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:If the Packers come away with an impact WR tonight do people STFU about last night?

I would, think we need to trade up to get one though.

chuckleslove · Post #383 » by **chuckleslove** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:52 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:If the Packers come away with an impact WR tonight do people STFU about last night?

Doubtful

LUKE23 · Post #384 » by **LUKE23** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:55 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:If the Packers come away with an impact WR tonight do people STFU about last night?

Yes, I think the mega impact guys will be gone without a trade up though. I have four on my list and a huge drop-off after that.

dbrodz7 · Post #385 » by **dbrodz7** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:55 pm

Bravo to whoever made this, I enjoyed this. https://www.captiongenerator.com/1791852/Hitler-reacts-to-Green-Bay-drafting-a-quarterback#.XqMfw7IvA20.twitter

Ron Swanson · Post #386 » by **Ron Swanson** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:56 pm

James1980 wrote:
Ron Swanson wrote:If there's one thing I do agree with it's that this probably puts some more pressure on Gary to pan out. But if you come out of the last 3 1st rounds with an All-Pro DT, a franchise Cornerback, and a rookie Safety who's an immediate starter, then you've successfully spent a damn good amount of high draft capital on "immediate impact/NFL-ready" players.

There's still a plethora of WR targets with 1st round grades available. Josh Jones has a Top-20 grade from most mocks I've seen, and he's still there as well. Plenty of "immediate impact" still available to satiate the angry local radio callers because contrary to their beliefs, the draft is more than just the first 32 picks.

When was Clark named All-Pro DT?

Semantics. He's already one of the best defensive tackles in the league at 24 years old. He's gonna make a couple All-Pro teams before his career is done.

Post #387 » by **ReasonablySober** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:57 pm

LUKE23 wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:If the Packers come away with an impact WR tonight do people STFU about last night?

Yes, I think the mega impact guys will be gone without a trade up though. I have four on my list and a huge drop-off after that.

I see at least double that left on the board, it just depends on what skill set you're looking for. Like, one of my favorites is Lynn Bowden Jr. and I don't think anyone has him mocked in the second. But he could be a real weapon in space and out of the backfield.

LUKE23 · Post #388 » by **LUKE23** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:59 pm

I would be OK with Hamler, so make it five I guess (although 5-9 is scary as hell). Not as big on Claypool, Van Jefferson, Dumernay as the other guys projected in top 45-50, IMO. I'm not saying we won't get some WR in the top 75 overall players, just saying I do think there is a drop-off. I think Packers need a legit, season one weapon.

Ron Swanson · Post #389 » by **Ron Swanson** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:00 pm

Didn't Kiper say that he had close to 15 WR's with 1st to early-2nd round grades in this draft? Yeah, it's crazy deep.

Daver · Post #390 » by **Daver** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:02 pm

LUKE23 wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:If the Packers come away with an impact WR tonight do people STFU about last night?

Yes, I think the mega impact guys will be gone without a trade up though. I have four on my list and a huge drop-off after that.

Well NO traded with GB and gave up a future 1st rounder if the packers really want to be aggressive they can easily move up into the 2nd round by giving up their 3rd next year or somethibg like that comeon BG higgins or mims

WeekapaugGroove · Post #391 » by **WeekapaugGroove** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:04 pm

If you're expecting a wr to come in with no OTAs and possibly a shortened camp and contribute much with a QB who's never really trusted rookies you're probably going to be disappointed.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using RealGM mobile app

jimmybones · Post #392 » by **jimmybones** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:11 pm

msiris wrote:
jimmybones wrote:
msiris wrote:But you act like he for sure is going to be just as good as ARod.

No one is sure of that. The point is the Packers think he could be and if they're right, "sacrificing" a 4th rd pick (and the opportunity cost of not taking someone else) is the most slam dunk no brainer ever.

Again, all that matters is - IS HE A FRANCHISE QB? If the answer is yes, it's incredibly silly to care at all about the 4th rd pick.
For me its not about a 4th round pick. Its about getting more help now. You cant tell me that Love is a better prospect than Queen. Most people had Queen above Love.And we have a huge hole there.

The dropoff from Queen to whatever other LB we draft is worth being able to stash a potential franchise QB. I think people are way over-estimating what impact any other player we would have drafted has on our super bowl odds next year.

raysbookclub · Post #393 » by **raysbookclub** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:13 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:
books wrote:
Treebeard wrote:I don't know if it's apropos of anything, but yesterday before the draft, one of my cousins and I were talking about Packer QB's in our lifetimes (We're both in our 60's) and in that of her kids. The only Packer QB's they have seen play are Favre and Rogers. My cousin and I have seen three Hall of Fame level talents in Starr, Favre, Rogers; along with a couple of pretty good QBs in Dickey, and Majkowski, and of course a lot of grade C (and lower) talent. As Packer fans, we've all been spoiled.

That's good perspective. Imagine having Randy Wright/Rich Campbell and other similar guys as the QB for 40 of the 50 years instead of 5 of the 50 like GB has had. That's the experience of a good chunk of teams.

This is the first time I’ve ever seen Rich Campbell mentioned on RealGM. Props!

lol, is there a prize?

raysbookclub · Post #394 » by **raysbookclub** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:21 pm

Treebeard wrote:
paulpressey25 wrote:
books wrote:
That's good perspective. Imagine having Randy Wright/Rich Campbell and other similar guys as the QB for 40 of the 50 years instead of 5 of the 50 like GB has had. That's the experience of a good chunk of teams.

This is the first time I’ve ever seen Rich Campbell mentioned on RealGM. Props!

Oh, let's see... in no particular order: Jim Del Gaizo, Scott Hunter, David Whitehurst, Jim Zorn. John Hadl, Jerry Tagge. I'm not counting the guys who were mostly backups.

I only know John Hadl, because of the infamous Dan Devine trade story, and Jim Zorn, because he was on Seattle when I was really little and now is a coach. To me, the other guys could be Madden-generated franchise-mode names or weekly Bowling Game winner names.

You should do a Packer deep-cut history thread. Just on QBs even. No joke, I'd be pretty entertained reading about these guys and other backup names I can excavate from my mind, like Anthony Dilweg and Blair Kiel.

Treebeard · Post #395 » by **Treebeard** » Fri Apr 24, 2020 10:53 pm

books wrote:
Treebeard wrote:
paulpressey25 wrote:
This is the first time I’ve ever seen Rich Campbell mentioned on RealGM. Props!

Oh, let's see... in no particular order: Jim Del Gaizo, Scott Hunter, David Whitehurst, Jim Zorn. John Hadl, Jerry Tagge. I'm not counting the guys who were mostly backups.

I only know John Hadl, because of the infamous Dan Devine trade story, and Jim Zorn, because he was on Seattle when I was really little and now is a coach. To me, the other guys could be Madden-generated franchise-mode names or weekly Bowling Game winner names.

You should do a Packer deep-cut history thread. Just on QBs even. No joke, I'd be pretty entertained reading about these guys and other backup names I can excavate from my mind, like Anthony Dilweg and Blair Kiel.

Not a bad idea after the draft. There are some doozy stories too

Bernman · Post #396 » by **Bernman** » Sat Apr 25, 2020 12:00 am

Overall, would the Patriots have been better off holding on to Jimmy G and trading Tommy B earlier, even though they did subsequently win a Super Bowl? I think it's debatable.

That's another sample to help answer the question of what the Packers should do in a similar situation a few yrs from now if Love looks pretty good by that point. Even when it works out, it questionably didn't.

Off the top of my head I can't think of situations where an older, legendary qb was jettisoned for a hot young thang, and then the team clearly regretted it because the guy didn't near live up to expectations. Not that it hasn't happened. Manning to Luck had mixed results.

RiotPunch · Post #397 » by **RiotPunch** » Sat Apr 25, 2020 12:25 am

This is aging very poorly for me, and I really like Jordan Love.

Karmaloop · Post #398 » by **Karmaloop** » Sat Apr 25, 2020 5:37 am

ReasonablySober wrote:If the Packers come away with an impact WR tonight do people STFU about last night?

No. Jordan Love could be the next Dan Marino and they'd still be upset with the pick. It's easier to dump on the pick then it is is to suppor tht epick.

RiotPunch · Post #399 » by **RiotPunch** » Sat Apr 25, 2020 5:43 am

Karmaloop wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:If the Packers come away with an impact WR tonight do people STFU about last night?

No. Jordan Love could be the next Dan Marino and they'd still be upset with the pick. It's easier to dump on the pick then it is is to suppor tht epick.

You had him as a 3rd rounder, yeah? Curious to know what you think two days into this thing?

Karmaloop · Post #400 » by **Karmaloop** » Sat Apr 25, 2020 6:05 am

RiotPunch wrote:You had him as a 3rd rounder, yeah? Curious to know what you think two days into this thing?

It's pretty damn clear that LaFleur's fingerprints are all over this thing. I've largely been a believer in Gute thus far. In his first year as GM, he essentially move down and back up for an extra FRP. He's the anti-Ted Thompson in the sense that he LOVES his athletes.

Hot Take on Love