Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 64
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    120,998
    Watt should be happy he didn't go here. He wouldn't have started haha.

    Agree on waiting. Way way way too early.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Mukwonago, WI
    Posts
    1,067
    I watched every Badger game with TJ and I can honestly say I didn't even think he was the best OLB on that roster (I thought Biegel and Cichy were both more impactful when healthy) . He will get some sacks and make some highlight plays because he's fast and somewhat small. Perfect player for a linebacker blitz. But lets be honest, he's not the dominant pass rusher thats going to draw 2-3 defenders and never will be. I'd be willing to bet he's weak against the run as well. Lets also not forget that TJ does have some injury concerns and his smaller frame doesn't help that.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,828
    Quote Originally Posted by twellner9 View Post
    TJ Watt could get 2 sacks every game this season and still wouldn't have the impact of an Aaron Rodgers. Besides that, unlike in Pittsburg Watt wouldn't be starting for us and its not like you can complain with how Nick Perry played. Perry and Daniels were the best players we put on the field Sunday.
    You can't argue that he's had much more impact in his first game with the Steelers than Aaron did in his first game with the Packers. Actually more impact than Aaron did in his first season. He has as many sacks as Perry had in his first season when Perry played in 6 games before he was injured and out for the season.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Mukwonago, WI
    Posts
    1,067
    Quote Originally Posted by Think View Post
    You can't argue that he's had much more impact in his first game with the Steelers than Aaron did in his first game with the Packers. Actually more impact than Aaron did in his first season. He has as many sacks as Perry had in his first season when Perry played in 6 games before he was injured and out for the season.
    What does first game have to do with career? You're arguing apples and oragnes. Sure TJ Watt had a better first game than most rookies will. But that doesn't mean he'll have a better career. He's never going to be the player that goes out and wins you a super bowl.

    By your argument we should also be pissed the packers drafted King over Kareem Hunt too? Basically any rookie that had a better first game than King is clearly a player we missed on.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    120,998
    How desperate to complain are you when you have to complain and compare draft picks after one game lol

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,446
    No, we shouldn't have drafted hunt over king because hunt wasn't a badger and doesn't have a famous brother. I believe those are the main draft criteria. I'm still learning which is the most important, but my understanding is those are the two best criteria for evaluating a player.

    If a player doesn't have a famous sibling and wasn't a badger, then I'm not sure what the criteria are. But I'm still a beginner draft fan. I'm sure I'll learn more next year too.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,842
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    Watt should be happy he didn't go here. He wouldn't have started haha.

    Agree on waiting. Way way way too early.
    I dont know, move clay to inside and mix in jones or burnett, watt on outside with perry might have been nice. When matthews played inside he locked it up well i thought

    Quote Originally Posted by Think View Post
    You can't argue that he's had much more impact in his first game with the Steelers than Aaron did in his first game with the Packers. Actually more impact than Aaron did in his first season. He has as many sacks as Perry had in his first season when Perry played in 6 games before he was injured and out for the season.
    You lost me on this argument, was that sarcasm? Comparing watt to rodgers first game and season? I dont see where you are going with that

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    120,998
    Quote Originally Posted by StickyGreenFan View Post
    I dont know, move clay to inside and mix in jones or burnett, watt on outside with perry might have been nice. When matthews played inside he locked it up well i thought



    You lost me on this argument, was that sarcasm? Comparing watt to rodgers first game and season? I dont see where you are going with that
    He's only happy when he has something to complain about lol

    I said this before but it we go OLB then people could look at some CB playing well and go hey why didn't we get him we need corners. That kind of thing.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,828
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    No, we shouldn't have drafted hunt over king because hunt wasn't a badger and doesn't have a famous brother. I believe those are the main draft criteria. I'm still learning which is the most important, but my understanding is those are the two best criteria for evaluating a player.

    If a player doesn't have a famous sibling and wasn't a badger, then I'm not sure what the criteria are. But I'm still a beginner draft fan. I'm sure I'll learn more next year too.
    Yeah, genetics has nothing to do with athletic ability.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    120,998
    It does. But it helps stock for guys it shouldn't all the time. Watts other brothers for example.

    There's no way around being a badger and a HOFers brother didn't pump up people's view.

    He could have been the identical athlete and player at another school with a different name and we'd have all cared less. It's not a lie. It's reality.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,446
    Quote Originally Posted by Think View Post
    Yeah, genetics has nothing to do with athletic ability.
    How many brother duos are in the NFL? There's the watt brothers. There's the bennetts. There's probably a couple more that I'm missing. And I know there's a lot of cousins in the league as well. But all in all, I bet there's not more than 5-10 brother duos in the league. So that makes 20 or so guys who have a brother in the league, which is around 1% of the league.

    According to a Chicago tribune report, roughly 80% of Americans have a sibling. So I would estimate anywhere between 30-50 percent of the league has a brother, many very well could have more than 1 brother. If purely genetics was such a big deal, particularly family genetics, then a lot more than 1% of the league should have a brother in the league.

    Tyus bowser had a similar combine performance to watt and is the closest sparq comparison for watt in recent years. I'd assume you're super upset that we didn't draft him too right?

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    565
    The only scenario where drafting watt would've been the smarter move is this:
    -if our pass rush struggles this season, and if our pass defense looks good WITHOUT any impact from Kevin King. Only then, can people make a case that picking Watt would've been the wiser choice. And even then, that argument would include the fact that the Packers undoubtedly knew Randall and Rollins would rebound and house would be a legit signing, meaning they were comfortable with drafting watt instead of a corner. Which would be an awful argument that nobody would believe lol
    Now to play devils advocate, one could also argue that the Packers could've signed a better CB in Free Agency which would've meant Watt would've been the obvious choice in the draft. But as someone said earlier, would Watt even be getting the same reps in GB as Pitt? Didn't he start for Pitt last week? He wouldn't have started for us last week.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    120,998
    Quote Originally Posted by Sdh09e44 View Post
    The only scenario where drafting watt would've been the smarter move is this:
    -if our pass rush struggles this season, and if our pass defense looks good WITHOUT any impact from Kevin King. Only then, can people make a case that picking Watt would've been the wiser choice. And even then, that argument would include the fact that the Packers undoubtedly knew Randall and Rollins would rebound and house would be a legit signing, meaning they were comfortable with drafting watt instead of a corner. Which would be an awful argument that nobody would believe lol
    Now to play devils advocate, one could also argue that the Packers could've signed a better CB in Free Agency which would've meant Watt would've been the obvious choice in the draft. But as someone said earlier, would Watt even be getting the same reps in GB as Pitt? Didn't he start for Pitt last week? He wouldn't have started for us last week.
    We whined that we cut a 7th round pick. If our first round pick wasn't starting think would cry about that too

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    iowa
    Posts
    6,812
    TJ Watt hurt his hamstring yesterday and didn't finish the game. That was one of the main things going against him was could he stay healthy.

    RIP Gene Wilder

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    120,998
    Quote Originally Posted by PackerBum9786 View Post
    TJ Watt hurt his hamstring yesterday and didn't finish the game. That was one of the main things going against him was could he stay healthy.
    Norm likes this post.

    Last week he was the guy we missed. This week King was the best rookie corner. Maybe best rookie D guy.

    Can't grade drafts this quick.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 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
  •