Packers Youth and Great Drafts (1 Viewer)

[The Dude]

Honestly other than the WR's they come up, where are these great young players they are churning out? That Defense looked horrible, the RB's looked meh.

Honest question - not just hating.

 

[shadyridr]

why did their def take such a step back this year?

 

[sho nuff]

Honestly other than the WR's they come up, where are these great young players they are churning out? That Defense looked horrible, the RB's looked meh. Honest question - not just hating.

If you just watched this game...sure.You know they have played quite a few other games the last 2 years though right?Raji, Matthews, Bishop, Shields, Williams, Collins, Burnett, Cobb, Jennings, Nelson, Jones, Rodgers....the list keeps going on and on.

 

[sho nuff]

why did their def take such a step back this year?

No pass rush.Letting Cullen Jenkins go...no push up the middle from Raji...no help opposite Matthews to free him up...Woodson's blitzes not getting home...Collins injury exposing the secondary with Peprah back there and Burnett moved to FS. And a bit of regression out of Tramon and Shields (or they played better than they really were last year).Lots of things.

 

[The Dude]

I gave them credit for the WR's - but are the other guys from your list that good?

 

[sho nuff]

I gave them credit for the WR's - but are the other guys from your list that good?

Clay Matthews? Nick Collins? Raji? Rodgers?No, they must suck.Again...have you watched them before today?There are a few on their Oline too (Sitton being the main one).

 

[Kitrick Taylor]

You do realize this team won a Superbowl just last year, and has won 22 of their last 24 right?

Didn't play well today at all. No doubt about that. That doesn't mean the players that they have aren't any good.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

You do realize this team won a Superbowl just last year, and has won 22 of their last 24 right? Didn't play well today at all. No doubt about that. That doesn't mean the players that they have aren't any good.

How dare you put thought into your post? Don't you know you have to base all of your posts on what has gone on the last 24 hours? The Packers are horrible and they can't draft.

 

[Captain Blowhard]

In a word, overrated.

The team. Their supposed talent. All of it. They might not even be the best team in their division come next year. The Bears will be healthy. The Lions are getting better. Couple that with Rodgers never again being that stupid stat wise, and the Packers are nothing more than, well, a team in the "pack" of good teams in the NFC. And there are quite a few now in that pack.

This year was their high-water mark.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

In a word, overrated. The team. Their supposed talent. All of it. They might not even be the best team in their division come next year. The Bears will be healthy. The Lions are getting better. Couple that with Rodgers never again being that stupid stat wise, and the Packers are nothing more than, well, a team in the "pack" of good teams in the NFC. And there are quite a few now in that pack.This year was their high-water mark.

Your name fits

 

[Captain Blowhard]

In a word, overrated. The team. Their supposed talent. All of it. They might not even be the best team in their division come next year. The Bears will be healthy. The Lions are getting better. Couple that with Rodgers never again being that stupid stat wise, and the Packers are nothing more than, well, a team in the "pack" of good teams in the NFC. And there are quite a few now in that pack.This year was their high-water mark.

Your name fits

And your name reminds me of a stage name in GLEE.

 

[Chaka]

In a word, overrated. The team. Their supposed talent. All of it. They might not even be the best team in their division come next year. The Bears will be healthy. The Lions are getting better. Couple that with Rodgers never again being that stupid stat wise, and the Packers are nothing more than, well, a team in the "pack" of good teams in the NFC. And there are quite a few now in that pack.This year was their high-water mark.

I think winning the Super Bowl might have been a little higher on the water mark scale. But that may just be me.

 

[Sabertooth]

why did their def take such a step back this year?

Cullen Jenkins is gone and Nick Collins got hurt.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

In a word, overrated. The team. Their supposed talent. All of it. They might not even be the best team in their division come next year. The Bears will be healthy. The Lions are getting better. Couple that with Rodgers never again being that stupid stat wise, and the Packers are nothing more than, well, a team in the "pack" of good teams in the NFC. And there are quite a few now in that pack.This year was their high-water mark.

I think winning the Super Bowl might have been a little higher on the water mark scale. But that may just be me.

LOL

 

[sho nuff]

In a word, overrated. The team. Their supposed talent. All of it. They might not even be the best team in their division come next year. The Bears will be healthy. The Lions are getting better. Couple that with Rodgers never again being that stupid stat wise, and the Packers are nothing more than, well, a team in the "pack" of good teams in the NFC. And there are quite a few now in that pack.This year was their high-water mark.

Your name fits

A lot of this recently in Packer threads.

 

[shadyridr]

why did their def take such a step back this year?

Cullen Jenkins is gone and Nick Collins got hurt.

who cares about cullen jenkins? hes solid but hes not a superstar and certainly not the sole reason for the defensive collapse. if he was so important the eagles defense wouldve been alot better this year

 

[The Dude]

I would like to hear from somebody with a little more objectivity than the Green n Gold lovers.

And where did I say I was only basing this on this one game?

 

[sho nuff]

why did their def take such a step back this year?

Cullen Jenkins is gone and Nick Collins got hurt.

who cares about cullen jenkins? hes solid but hes not a superstar and certainly not the sole reason for the defensive collapse. if he was so important the eagles defense wouldve been alot better this year

Well, you can't say because the Eagles sucked that it did not help.Look at his sack numbers.Now look at the numbers from that spot on the GB Dline.Jenkins was good against the run for GB and put presure on the QB from the DE spot. Thats huge for a team that consistently runs 2 Dline, and 4 LBs out there. He opened up things for Matthews, Raji and the other LBs to bring more pressure as well.Neal, Wilson, Green, Wynn simply don't do what Jenkins could do.

 

[sho nuff]

I would like to hear from somebody with a little more objectivity than the Green n Gold lovers.And where did I say I was only basing this on this one game?

You can claim homerism...but I listed a number of players.If you want to dispute them...go ahead.But most who have watched this team over the last 2 season will tell you the talent is there with those players.I stated it on this one game because its fresh in people's minds.But Shields and Tramon last year showed how talented they were, and some during this year.Matthews did not have a huge game this time but showed more all year.Desmond Bishop as well.The 3/5 of the Oline is pretty young and played pretty well this game. You can say people aren't being objective, but you don't even try refuting the names that have been brought up.

 

[The Dude]

I would like to hear from somebody with a little more objectivity than the Green n Gold lovers.And where did I say I was only basing this on this one game?

You can claim homerism...but I listed a number of players.If you want to dispute them...go ahead.But most who have watched this team over the last 2 season will tell you the talent is there with those players.I stated it on this one game because its fresh in people's minds.But Shields and Tramon last year showed how talented they were, and some during this year.Matthews did not have a huge game this time but showed more all year.Desmond Bishop as well.The 3/5 of the Oline is pretty young and played pretty well this game. You can say people aren't being objective, but you don't even try refuting the names that have been brought up.

I am only discounting your posts because you have been obsessed with defending the pack in every thread for the last 18 hours or so

 

[sho nuff]

I would like to hear from somebody with a little more objectivity than the Green n Gold lovers.And where did I say I was only basing this on this one game?

You can claim homerism...but I listed a number of players.If you want to dispute them...go ahead.But most who have watched this team over the last 2 season will tell you the talent is there with those players.I stated it on this one game because its fresh in people's minds.But Shields and Tramon last year showed how talented they were, and some during this year.Matthews did not have a huge game this time but showed more all year.Desmond Bishop as well.The 3/5 of the Oline is pretty young and played pretty well this game. You can say people aren't being objective, but you don't even try refuting the names that have been brought up.

I am only discounting your posts because you have been obsessed with defending the pack in every thread for the last 18 hours or so

Only, I have not defended what they did yesterday.They sucked.There is not much to defense. I have defended from the talk of one dimensional (because I don't think they played a one dimensional game last year, nor were they built to be one dimensional with no defense). I roll my eyes at the Flynn fishing.What I have defended has zero to do with the players I mentioned.People like to talk homerism...but they can never defend the claim.

 

[Warhogs]

Another thing that hurt the Green Bay defense a lot this year was Clay Matthews sacks were down and Green Bay has not got a lot of pressure on the QBs much of the year. I think they need to add one more big time pash rusher.

 

[sho nuff]

Another thing that hurt the Green Bay defense a lot this year was Clay Matthews sacks were down and Green Bay has not got a lot of pressure on the QBs much of the year. I think they need to add one more big time pash rusher.

That is where Jenkins comes in to play some...and that they got nothing out of Zombo, Jones, Walden...And not sure if its Jenkins and no other OLB...but Raji did not have much push up the middle this year the way he did last year.

 

[Dought Man]

State Farm curse did GB in... nothing else.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

Another thing that hurt the Green Bay defense a lot this year was Clay Matthews sacks were down and Green Bay has not got a lot of pressure on the QBs much of the year. I think they need to add one more big time pash rusher.

Correct. I've come to the realization that Mathews is not a dominant pass rusher. New York Giants have a dominant pass rusher. Green Bay does not.Now that said, Mathews is a very good pass rusher. However, he needs help. Find one guy that can push the pocket from the other side and you're whole defense immediately gets better. Is that guy out there right now?

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

Also, I do still question the O line picks. Sitton is very, very good. Bulaga just seems OK. And they've never adaquetly addressed left tackle. Sherrod may have been the answer, but his broken leg means no season next year. Newhouse was just OK all season. They need to take care of this left tackle spot.

 

[Flash]

In a word, overrated. The team. Their supposed talent. All of it. They might not even be the best team in their division come next year. The Bears will be healthy. The Lions are getting better. Couple that with Rodgers never again being that stupid stat wise, and the Packers are nothing more than, well, a team in the "pack" of good teams in the NFC. And there are quite a few now in that pack.This year was their high-water mark.

Gold Jerry, Gold!

 

[sho nuff]

Also, I do still question the O line picks. Sitton is very, very good. Bulaga just seems OK. And they've never adaquetly addressed left tackle. Sherrod may have been the answer, but his broken leg means no season next year. Newhouse was just OK all season. They need to take care of this left tackle spot.

I don't see them doing much there depending on Sherrod's recovery.I think they like Newhouse enough to keep him over there.I see them seeing Clifton's plans...then addressing it more for depth than using another high pick on a tackle.Unless they find a stopgap tackle in free agency...could just be hoping Clifton makes it through half a season and Newhouse holds up.

 

[massraider]

Honestly other than the WR's they come up, where are these great young players they are churning out? That Defense looked horrible, the RB's looked meh.

Honest question - not just hating.

QB: Rodgers and FlynnRB: Alex Green and James Starks. Studs? No. Contributors? Yes. 3rd and a 6th rounder.

WR: Obviously.

TE: Finley. Overrated? Well, yeah, but he was a 3rd round pick. Not a bad return. Think I might call him a nice draft pick.

OL: The weakness. Sherrod and Bulaga can go a long way towards fixing that, but the Pack have wasted some picks here.

DL: Raji, although I thought he regressed this year. CJ Wilson, 7th round pick, really contributed. Harrell was an injury-related bust.

LB: Matthews, Hawk, Bishop. No problems here.

DB: They have home grown Collins, Burnett, Tramon, and Shields.

I think if you are looking for reasons the Pack fell apart vs. the Giants, you can look at a lot of things, but the draft? I don't think so. This team has a lot of draft picks (and late draft picks) contributing. Looking at their picks over on drafthistory.com, I was struck by how they have been getting contributions from every round, it seems like.

They have very few out and out busts. Hawk wasn't worth the draft slot, but he is a solid NFL player. And they so many mid and late rounders that contribute.

 

[Flash]

Honestly other than the WR's they come up, where are these great young players they are churning out? That Defense looked horrible, the RB's looked meh.

Honest question - not just hating.

QB: Rodgers and FlynnRB: Alex Green and James Starks. Studs? No. Contributors? Yes. 3rd and a 6th rounder.

WR: Obviously.

TE: Finley. Overrated? Well, yeah, but he was a 3rd round pick. Not a bad return. Think I might call him a nice draft pick.

OL: The weakness. Sherrod and Bulaga can go a long way towards fixing that, but the Pack have wasted some picks here.

DL: Raji, although I thought he regressed this year. CJ Wilson, 7th round pick, really contributed. Harrell was an injury-related bust.

LB: Matthews, Hawk, Bishop. No problems here.

DB: They have home grown Collins, Burnett, Tramon, and Shields.

I think if you are looking for reasons the Pack fell apart vs. the Giants, you can look at a lot of things, but the draft? I don't think so. This team has a lot of draft picks (and late draft picks) contributing. Looking at their picks over on drafthistory.com, I was struck by how they have been getting contributions from every round, it seems like.

They have very few out and out busts. Hawk wasn't worth the draft slot, but he is a solid NFL player. And they so many mid and late rounders that contribute.

The Dude =

 

[sho nuff]

Honestly other than the WR's they come up, where are these great young players they are churning out? That Defense looked horrible, the RB's looked meh.

Honest question - not just hating.

QB: Rodgers and FlynnRB: Alex Green and James Starks. Studs? No. Contributors? Yes. 3rd and a 6th rounder.

WR: Obviously.

TE: Finley. Overrated? Well, yeah, but he was a 3rd round pick. Not a bad return. Think I might call him a nice draft pick.

OL: The weakness. Sherrod and Bulaga can go a long way towards fixing that, but the Pack have wasted some picks here.

DL: Raji, although I thought he regressed this year. CJ Wilson, 7th round pick, really contributed. Harrell was an injury-related bust.

LB: Matthews, Hawk, Bishop. No problems here.

DB: They have home grown Collins, Burnett, Tramon, and Shields.

I think if you are looking for reasons the Pack fell apart vs. the Giants, you can look at a lot of things, but the draft? I don't think so. This team has a lot of draft picks (and late draft picks) contributing. Looking at their picks over on drafthistory.com, I was struck by how they have been getting contributions from every round, it seems like.

They have very few out and out busts. Hawk wasn't worth the draft slot, but he is a solid NFL player. And they so many mid and late rounders that contribute.

The Dude =

Wouldn't say that...he was more asking and inquisitive than just trying to bash.

 

[Mario Kart]

The title of the thread sounds like a German wrote it.

 

[The Dude]

Honestly other than the WR's they come up, where are these great young players they are churning out? That Defense looked horrible, the RB's looked meh.

Honest question - not just hating.

QB: Rodgers and FlynnRB: Alex Green and James Starks. Studs? No. Contributors? Yes. 3rd and a 6th rounder.

WR: Obviously.

TE: Finley. Overrated? Well, yeah, but he was a 3rd round pick. Not a bad return. Think I might call him a nice draft pick.

OL: The weakness. Sherrod and Bulaga can go a long way towards fixing that, but the Pack have wasted some picks here.

DL: Raji, although I thought he regressed this year. CJ Wilson, 7th round pick, really contributed. Harrell was an injury-related bust.

LB: Matthews, Hawk, Bishop. No problems here.

DB: They have home grown Collins, Burnett, Tramon, and Shields.

I think if you are looking for reasons the Pack fell apart vs. the Giants, you can look at a lot of things, but the draft? I don't think so. This team has a lot of draft picks (and late draft picks) contributing. Looking at their picks over on drafthistory.com, I was struck by how they have been getting contributions from every round, it seems like.

They have very few out and out busts. Hawk wasn't worth the draft slot, but he is a solid NFL player. And they so many mid and late rounders that contribute.

The Dude =

Wouldn't say that...he was more asking and inquisitive than just trying to bash.

Good call, Sho - I give you credit like they did in that CHOKE thread (maybe even recant my earlier post above - but it did seem you were replying to every knuckleheaded comment on the board). I think even the above doesn't imply to me that this team is loaded with great young talent - maybe good but not great.

 

[Captain Blowhard]

Go Google Thompson's drafts. Collectively they've been very hit and miss. Take away the "great" players you can count on one hand and look at the rest: nothing special. Certainly nothing in the collective drafts to suggest the Packers will be head-and-shoulders above everyone else for the foreseeable future.

 

[thayman]

Go Google Thompson's drafts. Collectively they've been very hit and miss. Take away the "great" players you can count on one hand and look at the rest: nothing special. Certainly nothing in the collective drafts to suggest the Packers will be head-and-shoulders above everyone else for the foreseeable future.

So if you take away all the good picks his drafts look bad? No freaking kidding.

 

[thayman]

Honestly other than the WR's they come up, where are these great young players they are churning out? That Defense looked horrible, the RB's looked meh.

Honest question - not just hating.

QB: Rodgers and FlynnRB: Alex Green and James Starks. Studs? No. Contributors? Yes. 3rd and a 6th rounder.

WR: Obviously.

TE: Finley. Overrated? Well, yeah, but he was a 3rd round pick. Not a bad return. Think I might call him a nice draft pick.

OL: The weakness. Sherrod and Bulaga can go a long way towards fixing that, but the Pack have wasted some picks here.

DL: Raji, although I thought he regressed this year. CJ Wilson, 7th round pick, really contributed. Harrell was an injury-related bust.

LB: Matthews, Hawk, Bishop. No problems here.

DB: They have home grown Collins, Burnett, Tramon, and Shields.

I think if you are looking for reasons the Pack fell apart vs. the Giants, you can look at a lot of things, but the draft? I don't think so. This team has a lot of draft picks (and late draft picks) contributing. Looking at their picks over on drafthistory.com, I was struck by how they have been getting contributions from every round, it seems like.

They have very few out and out busts. Hawk wasn't worth the draft slot, but he is a solid NFL player. And they so many mid and late rounders that contribute.

A better question is how much is The Packers success tied to Rodgers? Does he get better or at least maintain his current level of play?

 

[bucsbaby]

This thread is insanity. I watched GB DOMINATE the league for most of the year minus the egg they laid in KC. They got beat by the getting-hot-at-the-right-time NYG, who match up really well with GB. But, otherwise, GB has been the class of the NFL this year and last.

 

[Captain Blowhard]

Honestly other than the WR's they come up, where are these great young players they are churning out? That Defense looked horrible, the RB's looked meh.

Honest question - not just hating.

QB: Rodgers and FlynnRB: Alex Green and James Starks. Studs? No. Contributors? Yes. 3rd and a 6th rounder.

WR: Obviously.

TE: Finley. Overrated? Well, yeah, but he was a 3rd round pick. Not a bad return. Think I might call him a nice draft pick.

OL: The weakness. Sherrod and Bulaga can go a long way towards fixing that, but the Pack have wasted some picks here.

DL: Raji, although I thought he regressed this year. CJ Wilson, 7th round pick, really contributed. Harrell was an injury-related bust.

LB: Matthews, Hawk, Bishop. No problems here.

DB: They have home grown Collins, Burnett, Tramon, and Shields.

I think if you are looking for reasons the Pack fell apart vs. the Giants, you can look at a lot of things, but the draft? I don't think so. This team has a lot of draft picks (and late draft picks) contributing. Looking at their picks over on drafthistory.com, I was struck by how they have been getting contributions from every round, it seems like.

They have very few out and out busts. Hawk wasn't worth the draft slot, but he is a solid NFL player. And they so many mid and late rounders that contribute.

A better question is how much is The Packers success tied to Rodgers? Does he get better or at least maintain his current level of play?

If you want to bet on Rodgers having another year next year like he did this year, be my guest. I find that probability highly unlikely. What was he the year before--28/11? Unless of course you think he's going to break the all-time TD record by the time he's 30. Then you can keep betting on him putting up these numbers every year.

 

[Captain Blowhard]

This thread is insanity. I watched GB DOMINATE the league for most of the year minus the egg they laid in KC. They got beat by the getting-hot-at-the-right-time NYG, who match up really well with GB. But, otherwise, GB has been the class of the NFL this year and last.

They were the class of the NFL last year in the regular season? Really? They squeaked into the playoffs and had an impressive run once they got there, yes. This year they continually pulled games out of their behinds because good-weather play of Rodgers masked the horrid (and 32-ranked) defense. They had a good record this year. Rodgers put up a lot of pretty stats. But they were definitely exposed as being posers of the "class" crown.

 

[Captain Blowhard]

Go Google Thompson's drafts. Collectively they've been very hit and miss. Take away the "great" players you can count on one hand and look at the rest: nothing special. Certainly nothing in the collective drafts to suggest the Packers will be head-and-shoulders above everyone else for the foreseeable future.

So if you take away all the good picks his drafts look bad? No freaking kidding.

My point is his drafts are average. Many teams hits on some key picks and have a handful of good players to build around. The Packers will be competitive--right along with a gaggle of other young and talented teams in the NFC. The problem is with you Packer fans and/or apologists who want to crown their asses moving forward from this point as "the" team to beat or something. Um, no. They can take a number like everyone else wanting to be that team. They're in the muddled mix of good teams in the NFC moving forward. Nothing more. Nothing less.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

Go Google Thompson's drafts. Collectively they've been very hit and miss. Take away the "great" players you can count on one hand and look at the rest: nothing special. Certainly nothing in the collective drafts to suggest the Packers will be head-and-shoulders above everyone else for the foreseeable future.

So if you take away all the good picks his drafts look bad? No freaking kidding.

My point is his drafts are average. Many teams hits on some key picks and have a handful of good players to build around. The Packers will be competitive--right along with a gaggle of other young and talented teams in the NFC. The problem is with you Packer fans and/or apologists who want to crown their asses moving forward from this point as "the" team to beat or something. Um, no. They can take a number like everyone else wanting to be that team. They're in the muddled mix of good teams in the NFC moving forward. Nothing more. Nothing less.

SB last year and 15=1 in the regular season. Of course they've been the team to beat for the last season, plus. They have a ring. They don't have to take any numbers, they've done what the "gaggle" of other young and talented teams in the NFC are trying to do. You're still fishing Blowhard.

 

[MaxThreshold]

This thread is insanity. I watched GB DOMINATE the league for most of the year minus the egg they laid in KC. They got beat by the getting-hot-at-the-right-time NYG, who match up really well with GB. But, otherwise, GB has been the class of the NFL this year and last.

They were the class of the NFL last year in the regular season? Really? They squeaked into the playoffs and had an impressive run once they got there, yes. This year they continually pulled games out of their behinds because good-weather play of Rodgers masked the horrid (and 32-ranked) defense. They had a good record this year. Rodgers put up a lot of pretty stats. But they were definitely exposed as being posers of the "class" crown.

You're really going to classify the Packers as "pulling it out from their behind" most of the time? You seriously going to tow that line? It's clear you don't like the Packers, but it's coloring your opinion to the point of not being taken seriously. Their defense was horrible, but every team has deficiencies at one point or another. Some have good offenses and no defense (Packers, Saints, GIANTS for most of the season, Patriots, etc..), some have good DEF and no offense (49ers, Ravens 50% of the time, etc..). What's your point? That some team has to be perfect in all facets otherwise they are posers? I would say a Superbowl ring followed up by 15-1 is as close to perfect as you're going to get most of the time. Sure, their defense was exposed early but everyone knew their defense sucked from the 3rd game on and that it was going to be up to the offense to overcome that. That's old news. EVERY Team has to mask or overcome deficiencies in their OFF or DEF.The Packers clearly outplayed every team they faced (except two - KC and Giants) by featuring an overpowering and precision offense. Too bad it failed them when they needed it most, but that doesn't make them posers.I don't understand the hate. Why is that? Is it jealousy? Serious question.

 

[sho nuff]

Go Google Thompson's drafts. Collectively they've been very hit and miss. Take away the "great" players you can count on one hand and look at the rest: nothing special. Certainly nothing in the collective drafts to suggest the Packers will be head-and-shoulders above everyone else for the foreseeable future.

You might want to google a little better if you want to figure out that his drafts and picks are pretty darn good.His percentage of guys still with the Packers or on other NFL rosters is very good.

 

[sho nuff]

Go Google Thompson's drafts. Collectively they've been very hit and miss. Take away the "great" players you can count on one hand and look at the rest: nothing special. Certainly nothing in the collective drafts to suggest the Packers will be head-and-shoulders above everyone else for the foreseeable future.

So if you take away all the good picks his drafts look bad? No freaking kidding.

My point is his drafts are average. Many teams hits on some key picks and have a handful of good players to build around. The Packers will be competitive--right along with a gaggle of other young and talented teams in the NFC. The problem is with you Packer fans and/or apologists who want to crown their asses moving forward from this point as "the" team to beat or something. Um, no. They can take a number like everyone else wanting to be that team. They're in the muddled mix of good teams in the NFC moving forward. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Problem is...what you call average...most who actually analyze drafts call above average and very good.They will compete for the foreseeable future in their division and the NFC...are they the class? Not on their own...but they are one of a few that will be there year in and year out for a little while.Why? Because of the drafts they have had.

 

[thayman]

Go Google Thompson's drafts. Collectively they've been very hit and miss. Take away the "great" players you can count on one hand and look at the rest: nothing special. Certainly nothing in the collective drafts to suggest the Packers will be head-and-shoulders above everyone else for the foreseeable future.

So if you take away all the good picks his drafts look bad? No freaking kidding.

My point is his drafts are average. Many teams hits on some key picks and have a handful of good players to build around. The Packers will be competitive--right along with a gaggle of other young and talented teams in the NFC. The problem is with you Packer fans and/or apologists who want to crown their asses moving forward from this point as "the" team to beat or something. Um, no. They can take a number like everyone else wanting to be that team. They're in the muddled mix of good teams in the NFC moving forward. Nothing more. Nothing less.

I'm not even a Packer fan, I can base my opinions in reality and not be clouded by jealousy of their organization. Not only have Thompson's drafts been above average he came in in 2005 when The Packers were way over the cap, made some tough cuts and got the team back to being pretty good. Not to mention parting ways with Favre at the correct time.

 

[Captain Blowhard]

Good. We all agree that the Packers are just one of the good teams in the muddled NFC.

See? That wasn't so hard.

 

[massraider]

There are several new names round here that are really going out of their way to be tools.

Are these all someone's aliases or what? Anyone else notice this?

 

[sho nuff]

There are several new names round here that are really going out of their way to be tools.Are these all someone's aliases or what? Anyone else notice this?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

There are several new names round here that are really going out of their way to be tools.Are these all someone's aliases or what? Anyone else notice this?

Agreed, but there are some old names that belong to tools as well.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Packers do have some strong young talent, but I think it's a little over blown in the minds of some of their fans..

You could name as many strong young players for most teams.