who SHOULD it have been guys........

byzr · Joined: 31 Jan 2005 Posts: 2761 Location: Kentucky

who SHOULD have we have drafted instead of Rodgers guys? knowing who was stil available at the time who would you guys have drafted.

me it would have been Rudd probably, LB's are so important they play practically every position.
_________________

DarthFavre · Joined: 06 Apr 2005 Posts: 136

Poole or Ruud

hauschild · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 14492

Pool, but I would have traded up to try to get Thomas Davis or David Pollack.

duxrule · Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 3110

None of those guys has the value of Rogers. NONE of them.

hauschild · Joined: 23 Feb 2005 Posts: 14492

dux,

We'll agree to disagree on this one. I understand your point, and I realize every pick of an NCAA football player is a gamble, there is no bigger gamble than taking a QB in round one.

There is a reason why 15 teams who picked ahead of Green Bay, who also had pedestrian QB's at best, passed on Rodgers. I'm not just jumping to conclusions here.

Just because the God-awful media had him rated high, doesn't mean he had any value because 23 teams passed on him. And, I know you'll get the usual BS from TT about "He was the highest rated on our board" crap.

I just don't think this was the best pick we could have made to improve our football team. Sure, we've busted in the 1st round before, last year, the year of Bubba Franks and Jamaal Reynolds, etc. But that hurts in the long run because those last few picks are the reasons why we have no depth on our team anymore.

That's what rocked about Holmgren and Wolf...we always had tremendous depth, which helped at playoff time. So, we won't know for 4 years and at least 15 millions dollars, if this kid is worth a lick. That is just plain illogical IMHO. I don't know how anyone can possibly sugar-coat this? I mean you can wrap a pretty bow around a turd, but it's still gonna stink!

titanrick · Joined: 17 Jan 2005 Posts: 11326 Location: Denver, CO

I grew up in WI and despite my obvious allegiances, I still follow the Pack.

My heartfelt condolences to all the Pack fans. What a horrific pick. Brett agrees to come back another year and they spend a first round pick on THE ONLY GUY who can't help him win. That's just insane.
_________________

"The good outnumber you, and we always will." - Patton Oswalt

SacredStar · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 1578 Location: Kansas City

The Packers had to take a chance on Rogers imo.

How could anyone argue selecting a Top 5 projected player no matter what the need?

stallyns · Joined: 02 Dec 2004 Posts: 21480 Location: 414

well for one san fran and green bay were obviously the only ones who held him to that pedestal, and san fran had other options

duxrule · Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 3110

Who else was going to take him between 3 and 24?? GB obviously felt that they have needs on D, but that Bretts Heir was falling into their laps. How many of these D players are SURE STARTERS for Opening Day? Pool over Freeman or Little. Little was telling Bates about things in the system during the interview with him and Freeman came from Miami WITH Bates. Why take that pick? NO REASON. Got 3 guys that are starters at LB that Thurman may or may not have been able to displace.

D line--which guy was going to take over for Kampman that they just spent over a million dollars on and start? We already agreed that they probably WON'T cut Hunt, and Grady is our interior stud. Which guy was coming out of the lineup guys? Maybe Carroll, but how happy are ANY of us if they take a 2nd round QB in round 1 and he doesn't start?

Sit back and relax. It's not all bad.