e he doesn't have a very high success rate. It's not a problem if you can shore up those misses in FA, but he doesn't do the FA thing, so he really has to hit on a higher percentage of draft picks in a Polian-Model. Just because they start on the Packers doesn't mean their talent level dictates that they should be a starter.
One of the last things I have read from Gil Brandt I believe was about TT's success level in the draft actually being quite good.
Not sure where you are getting that he does not have a high success rate.
Plenty of solid players, plus the stars of Rodgers, Jennings, and Collins.
One sec...Really? You were sold on him and the line being good to go last year!? :lmfao: haha..
Where did I say me? I said there were plenty more than him sold.
Never claimed the line would just be good to go. I thought RT would be a question mark. Nobody in the organization thought he would be that much of a disaster.
My point there was that they had major line problems which included Barbre and zero depth behind LT. So somehow TT feels compelled to grab stubs Bulaga who by most accounts wont start his rookie year unless injury forces the issue. They had no reason to take a project lineman when they could have easily found better value waiting for the second round and drafting Charles Brown. To be honest in a Polian-Model I wouldn't have taken Wilson either but the B.P.A. and that was Dez Bryant. That pick had potential to solidify a Packer offensive juggernaut for years to come. I think they get burned here a la 1998. How'd Vonnie Holliday work out for you again? Or Brandon Jackson on your second chance at Moss?
He won't need to start his rookie year, that does not make him a project. LT was a bigger need than CB was. Sorry, it just was.
And they feel Bulaga is far better than Brown...why go there.
And no, Dez Bryant would have been a terrible pick for them.
Holliday worked out just fine actually.
Brandon Jackson was bad...Moss was not coming...sorry, he never liked what was going to be asked of him...he said so himself.
All major liabilities in the secondary. There was a few good options this year and the team passed all of them and should be easily shredded by balanced teams once again.
Tramon is not a major liability. We don't know of the others. But "good options" as rookies I don't think would be any better than the guys they have. But glad you can tell the future. Have this week's lottery numbers for me?
Aside from all the other spots mentioned, you're happy with the pass rush from the LOLB? How many sacks did the Pack record against the Vikes last year? Hell, screw sacks, how many hours did Brett have in the pocket last year? Are you buying the nonsense that Burnett can step right in and not get owned on a weekly basis?
Im happy with Clay Matthews, I think Jones can be pretty good in the rotation (he easily outperformed what Kampman was doing in his few games starting...as a rookie.
So its now just about getting sacks against one team they play twice?
Burnett? Again, Im glad you know the future and will just proclaim all Packer picks busts and going to get owned.
Everything could be rosey and all those guys could work out, but I still feel at some point that unless TT makes a few big FA moves to shore up some of the weaker spots it's going to be a never ending cycle where a major lack of talent in one area will doom the team against more balanced teams."My point is all teams have holes right now, even those that use FA quite a bit.
There was not really a great rush OLB out there was there? Or corner? Or just some LT/RT that really is worth the time over what they have in house right now.
Would a bit more depth be good? Sure...any team can say that right now though.
Just seems an awful lot of Ted Thompson bashing given he has done pretty well despite some controversy out there.
When he has dabbled into FA he has hit pretty well in Woodson and Pickett.
Here we go again...
Favre=fail since 1996.
:X 
Serenity now Packer fans! SERENITY NOW!!! 
Here we go again...
