Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





View Poll Results: What position do you personally hope we pick in the first round? And give brief why!

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • RB

    3 13.64%
  • LT

    2 9.09%
  • RT, move Bulaga to LT

    0 0%
  • ILB

    4 18.18%
  • CB

    0 0%
  • NT

    0 0%
  • DT/DE

    10 45.45%
  • OG

    0 0%
  • S

    2 9.09%
  • WR

    1 4.55%
  • CENTER

    0 0%
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 70
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,220
    vCash
    1500

    What position do you personally hope we pick in the first round? And give brief why!

    What position do you personally hope we pick in the first round? And give brief why!
    NFC Here we come!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    17,852
    vCash
    1500
    Not sure what position I hope we take. The more I look at guys in the 1st and 2nd round the more I think they'd be an upgrade. There are some good S out there that are in that 1st and 2nd round range that I hope we look at but I'm not sure if that's the direction Ted will go. Unless someone real good drops I think it'll be receiver mainly because that will be the highest position of need to replenish.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,972
    vCash
    1500
    I think the DL is the weakest position on this team.... especially a 34DE that can put pressure on the QB... i hope TT goes that route but if there is a better player available at S, OL, NT, or S then I won't be upset....

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    SoDak
    Posts
    84,114
    vCash
    1777
    I'm never a positional guy. Take a good prospect who fits a need.

    That being said, I would probably lean towards a DL guy who can get after the passer a bit but isn't a complete one trick pony. If you twisted my arm........
    Quote Originally Posted by Seppuku View Post
    Hear ye, hear ye! Bring forth the possibly real and possibly imaginary poll.



    Oops, I wasn't bull****ting.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    SoDak
    Posts
    84,114
    vCash
    1777
    Quote Originally Posted by petrey10 View Post
    I think the DL is the weakest position on this team.... especially a 34DE that can put pressure on the QB... i hope TT goes that route but if there is a better player available at S, OL, NT, or S then I won't be upset....
    Totally agree. Look at the way the Giants do it. You can never have enough of those guys.
    Quote Originally Posted by Seppuku View Post
    Hear ye, hear ye! Bring forth the possibly real and possibly imaginary poll.



    Oops, I wasn't bull****ting.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,220
    vCash
    1500
    I went LT, but the idea of moving Bulaga to the left side and drafting Alabama's D.J. Fluker is really intriguing to me. Our OL just bogged down our total offense this past year. Fluker next to Sitton should open some holes ro run in. I don't by no means wanna give up on Sherrod, but can't count on him at this point and time. Worst case scenario is move Bulaga or Fluker inside. But because I'm not 100% sold that Bulaga would be just as good on the left side, I voted LT.
    NFC Here we come!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    876
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by cooters22 View Post
    What position do you personally hope we pick in the first round? And give brief why!
    If every position had the same amount of talent in it when we pick I want DL. Why? Why not

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,972
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by cooters22 View Post
    I went LT, but the idea of moving Bulaga to the left side and drafting Alabama's D.J. Fluker is really intriguing to me. Our OL just bogged down our total offense this past year. Fluker next to Sitton should open some holes ro run in. I don't by no means wanna give up on Sherrod, but can't count on him at this point and time. Worst case scenario is move Bulaga or Fluker inside. But because I'm not 100% sold that Bulaga would be just as good on the left side, I voted LT.

    IDK to me our OL is fine... we just need to stay healthy and play more games together as a unit.... with Bulaga, Sherrod, and Datko coming back from injury we have the depth needed and IMO our line was about average by the end of the year. I put more sacks on the shoulders of Rodgers than I do the OL just because he holds the ball too long. Ya the deep ball is awesome but if you avoid the sack(throwing it away) or check down for minimal gain you have a positive play.

    I also think if you continue to move people around on the line it only hurts their performances....


    again if the BPA is an OL fine... i won't be upset...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,220
    vCash
    1500
    The Sherrod thing just scares me. I guess the coaching staff knows more than us if he will or should be healthy and if he'll be any good.
    NFC Here we come!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,955
    vCash
    1500
    I voted safety. The obvious choice is Defensive Line, but that is a terrible route to go in the first round. If somebody was to make a list of defensive linemen taken after about the tenth overall pick, they would find that the position very rarely produces much in their first year. (I would actually challenge somebody to do the legwork on this). At the same time, a defensive lineman is much easier to attain in free agency. Even if the player wasn't a big name free agent, a veteran coming in who already knows the pace of the NFL, the conditioning necessary for the NFL and the expectations of a 3-4 DL in the NFL can be had for very close to the same amount of money. Also, there is NFL tape to judge the player by. Somebody like Seymour, Starks or Bryant (together with Raji, Pickett and a rotation of Wilson, Neal, Worthy and a potential fourth-seventh round DL) will effectively fix the defensive line.

    The offensive line, I feel, is good enough so that we don't have to reach in the draft to address it. Sherrod should figure in somewhere, Newhouse and Lang are at least competent, Bulaga I think is solid, Sitton is solid and EDS can get the job done. Competition can be added to the offensive line in later rounds, such as 3-7.

    Quarterback? Please.

    Running back I think would be unnecessary. Green, Starks, Harris can provide enough of a threat to not allow too many guys back in coverage, and Harris could turn out to have a big impact. Grant and Benson are guys that could be brought in if nobody establishes themselves. At the same time, a RB threat could turn this offense into the offense it was two years ago, but it's not offense that is a problem.

    Tight End is a position I would be okay with addressing in the first round, but not if Finley is still on the roster. And again, offense is not the problem.

    Receiver isn't nearly as strong as everybody and their grandmother seems to think it is. Cobb, Nelson, Jones. That's it, really. With injury concerns now a very serious reality in Green Bay, a position of strength could quickly become a weakness. We don't have anybody beyond those guys that has much experience. Still, offense is not the problem, and Thompson likes his second round receivers.

    Cornerback is a very strong position for the Packers, and it doesn't get much weaker if our starter was traded. Williams has the potential to shut down a receiver, but he has to live up to that potential, and I think if other positions are addressed, he can do that.

    Linebacker I think is another POTENTIAL weakness, but with Bishop and Perry coming back, I think the Packers can rest a little easier with that knowledge.

    Which brings me to my answer. Safety. I direct your attention to the number one player I wanted more than any other in last year's draft: Harrison Smith. Smith proved to be a very strong contributor in his first year. Run stopping and pass coverage with many big plays throughout the year. If I had a vote, I would name Smith or Hayward as DROY, but tackles are overpriced and overrated in the voting, so Keuchly will get the award. Just think back to when Nick Collins was here. Not many safeties had the speed and the quickness to make up as much ground as Nick Collins, and it made our defense completely different. Just take a look at what happened to our defense after losing him. We gave up more passing yards than any team in NFL history. His talent was almost Ed Reed like. The plays he made in coverage were astounding. His hands were great, his speed was great and he had the potential to take a RB out of the game with his coverage abilities (as he did to Bush one game). Look at the safeties in the Super Bowl. Look at safeties on consistently good defenses. I don't think a team can have a top defense without at least one top flight safety. The Ravens have Reed (pass coverage) and Pollard (punishing run stopper). I really truly strongly believe that a safety would completely change this defense, and I will be crossing my fingers hoping that a worthy safety drops down to the Packers.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,220
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Tongue-Splitter View Post
    I voted safety.

    Which brings me to my answer. Safety. I direct your attention to the number one player I wanted more than any other in last year's draft: Harrison Smith. Smith proved to be a very strong contributor in his first year. Run stopping and pass coverage with many big plays throughout the year. If I had a vote, I would name Smith or Hayward as DROY, but tackles are overpriced and overrated in the voting, so Keuchly will get the award. Just think back to when Nick Collins was here. Not many safeties had the speed and the quickness to make up as much ground as Nick Collins, and it made our defense completely different. Just take a look at what happened to our defense after losing him. We gave up more passing yards than any team in NFL history. His talent was almost Ed Reed like. The plays he made in coverage were astounding. His hands were great, his speed was great and he had the potential to take a RB out of the game with his coverage abilities (as he did to Bush one game). Look at the safeties in the Super Bowl. Look at safeties on consistently good defenses. I don't think a team can have a top defense without at least one top flight safety. The Ravens have Reed (pass coverage) and Pollard (punishing run stopper). I really truly strongly believe that a safety would completely change this defense, and I will be crossing my fingers hoping that a worthy safety drops down to the Packers.
    You make a strong point and argument, greatly explained.
    NFC Here we come!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    5,422
    vCash
    1500
    Its very tough for me to do positionally as well. I really think a fast, playmaking ILB would be a huge addition for this team. However, if there's not a guy we think can develop into that type of player when we pick, I'm fine with letting Hawk (if he's still around), Jones (if he's resigned) and Smith battle it out. They are all good depth guys/mediocre starters, so we either need to take an impact ILB or no ILB at all in my mind.

    DL is a position I'm in the air on. Obviously we could use a pass rusher at that position. I like the potential of Worthy if he works hard (and gets healthy). Neal will continue to improve if he can stay healthy. So I guess if we could get another guy to compete at that spot, I wouldn't complain at all.

    I agree with Tongue Splitter at safety too. I think Burnett is a pretty decent player. I'm fine with him being the starter. I don't think he'll ever be a stud, but I think he'll be a more than serviceable starter. Jennings and McMillian are okay depth guys and maybe they could develop into good players, but I haven't seen anything out of them that would make me pass on a safety if there was one we really liked at our spot in the draft.

    So those are the 3 spots I would probably be the most likely to look at. For the sake of the poll, I voted ILB because if there was an impact player available in our pick at all 3 spots, that's the one I would take. I know most people would disagree with that, but I think an impact ILB would change our defense drastically.

    Edit: Although its highly unlikely to happen, if a guy somehow fell who we truly thought could be a day 1 true LT, I would have to consider that too, but those guys are rarely get past the top 10-15 these days.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    at the beach
    Posts
    3,024
    vCash
    1500
    We need pass rushers. DL's or LBs. We still don't know how good Perry might be. We can't gamble on hoping that he will be. Need to make sure we have another legit rusher on the other side of Matthews.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Coral Springs Florida
    Posts
    12,346
    vCash
    1500
    I went LT, because I feel we can upgrade immediately there.. Most important position on the offensive line and we have question marks there.. i'd love to have Bulaga working at LT for a full offseason, but he's got to worry about rehabbing first.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    5,422
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Rtardz View Post
    We need pass rushers. DL's or LBs. We still don't know how good Perry might be. We can't gamble on hoping that he will be. Need to make sure we have another legit rusher on the other side of Matthews.
    I don't know that its necessarily a gamble to stay with Perry to be honest. They obviously saw something the liked when the drafted him. He was good enough to basically start right away. I will give you that he didn't have the best competition, but he still started basically from Day 1. We've also had him in the classroom and things all this season. So we've had an opportunity to see him, either we like him or we don't.

    Quote Originally Posted by robdizzle3 View Post
    I went LT, because I feel we can upgrade immediately there.. Most important position on the offensive line and we have question marks there.. i'd love to have Bulaga working at LT for a full offseason, but he's got to worry about rehabbing first.
    This is something that I can't agree with at all. I don't mean to call you personally out, but I feel like I've heard this a lot. People feel that its easy to find LTs in the draft. Unless you're drafting in the top 10-15, the prospective LTs available generally have at least one big glaring hole. I really don't think there's any chance that there's really going to be a LT sitting around when we pick that's an immediate apparent upgrade over what we have. Basically, we'll be drafting another Derek Sherrod type of guy, who others pass on because there's legit questions to whether or not they can play LT.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •