1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up/a> or Log In

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Packers will consider Young in the Draft

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by porky88, Apr 9, 2006.

  1. porky88
    Offline

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    Title Town
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Source is ESPN's Len Pasqureli.. I think they'd take him if Mario Williams and AJ Hawk are both off the board but that's unlikely.

    If you look at the big picture here it wouldn't be too bad unless your a pure Young hater. Young vs Rodgers Young is clearly the better prospect. He's clearly the better player and if his potential is reached the Pack would be winning in know time. I can see Green Bay winning with Vince Young at the helm in future. Not Aaron Rodgers..

    Right now I think Young is the Packs 3rd option but if this does happen I wouldn't be shocked one bit and I'd be pretty happy. I'm not an Aaron Rodgers fan and we could move him easily without taking a hit and probably get 2 picks for him or a solid defensive player.

    I also have a hunch that 90% of this board is going to disagree with this. :lol:
  2. Toronto_Cheesehead
    Offline

    Toronto_Cheesehead Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    192
    Location:
    Toronto
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Say no to Young.

    If Williams and Hawk are gone, take Davis or trade down.
  3. paxvogel
    Offline

    paxvogel Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Messages:
    501
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    If Hawk and Williams are gone then they will have a lot of suitors to move up for Young or Cutler and they should trade. Oakland really wants Young so I would trade down two spots to get an extra second round pick. I would prefer Rodgers over Young at QB, weather in later months likely to make Young's ability to run less valuable and I am not convinced of his ability to make throws in NFL where everyone will be faster and bigger and you really need a fine touch.
  4. route25
    Offline

    route25 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2006
    Messages:
    162
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    This could be a little gamesmanship by TT. TT may be sending out signals that he is interested in Young because he would love to have someone trade up into the top 4 and take Young. That would increase the chances of the Packers getting Mario or Hawk.
  5. musccy
    Offline

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Location:
    Lynchburg, VA
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    It didn't seem to affect Vick when he played us in the playoffs...if you run a 4.3, and the cb runs a 4.5...the 4.3 guy is still faster, regardless of conditions.

    I too don't know about his throwing ability...but what he did v. USC was very telling...and you draft football players, not just ppl that post the best combine #s.

    I'm not sold on Rodgers, so if the pack feel Young is best available, I'd still take him
  6. P@ck66
    Offline

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -1
    I wouldn't draft Young...

    Players like that depend on their legs and good field conditions to run in as part of their game...all it takes is a leg or knee injury to turn them into a very average pocket passing QB...

    (look what happened to Vick in Atlanta..)
  7. porky88
    Offline

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    Title Town
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    WORD.. Young > Rodgers. Rodgers had a pretty bad Training Camp and I don't know bout you guys but I don't think he's a Starting NFL QB. I think he'll end up being a career backup somewhere after he leaves GB.

    Young is much different than Vick. Vick is injury prone cause he isn't built to take the kind of punishment he receives. Vick is 6-0 210 I think. Young is 6-5 230...

    I wouldn't take Young over Super Mario but if they even took Young over Hawk. I'd be ok with that.
  8. SuperRat
    Offline

    SuperRat Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Messages:
    617
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    If Young is available at number 5 I see a definite trade down for more picks situation. Young isn't going to be as dominant in the NFL as he was in college. He takes off and runs and many more defensive players in the NFL could catch up to him than college players. NFL players are going to be able to tackle him much better also. You won't see him running through nearly as many tackles. His throwing motion looks like he sees that he has poo in his hand and is trying to flick it off. I would much rather have a more conventional QB in Rodgers and use the pick for a bigger need.
  9. PackerLegend
    Offline

    PackerLegend Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,947
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Stop Saying That A-Rod Sucks, UNTIL YOU SEE HIM PLAY A COUPLE OF DAMN GAMES HOW MANY ROOKIE QBS GO OUT AND MAKE MIRACLES THE FIRST YEAR THEY PLAY. THEY NEED TIME TO ADJUST AND YOU HAVENT EVEN SEEN THIS KID PLAY AT ALL MY GOD GIVE HIM A BREAK.

    THERE IS NO WAY I THINK THE PACK SHOULD DRAFT YOUNG TAKE MARIO OR HAWK WE
  10. porky88
    Offline

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    Title Town
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    If you watch Aaron Rodgers at all this year he looked awful. Practices & Preseason.. I'm not saying he sucks. I'm saying I don't think he can a starting QB in the NFL. I think he'll end up being a nice backup. At best in Rodgers I think you'll get maybe John Kitna.. in Vince Young you could get Randall Cunningham or someone who could change the position forever.

    I agree that if Super Mario is on the board he should be the pick but if he's off the board and Green Bay can't trade down then Young wouldn't be a bad pick.
  11. SuperRat
    Offline

    SuperRat Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2005
    Messages:
    617
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Wow based on a rookie's practices and preseason you can know how his entire career is going? Especially compared to a guy that hasn't played preseason games or practiced in the NFL? That is like saying that Rodgers did bad at first so he will always suck but Bruce Gradkowski did good in college so he has more of a chance of being a guy that could change the position forever. You don't know they haven't been tested in the NFL. Peyton Manning did pretty bad in his rookie season. Carson Palmer probably didn't look too great when he was the backup his rookie season. These things take time.
  12. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    good point, rat.
  13. arrowgargantuan
    Offline

    arrowgargantuan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    3,645
    Location:
    San Jose, Ca.
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0
    Vote NO on Young in 2006!
  14. all about da packers
    Offline

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    If Mario and Hawk are off the board, go with Davis or Huff. Davis is a freak, and Huff has AMAZING potential.
  15. gmann001
    Offline

    gmann001 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    190
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0
    I agree, isn't the Raiders Al Davis supposedly drooling at the prospect of getting this kid? Maybe TT is trying a bluff to get Al give up some picks.
  16. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    Remember when Eli was drafted by the Chargers even though Eli was said he would not play for them? Chargers got some nice picks out of it. I wonder if the Packers would be that ballzie.
  17. porky88
    Offline

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    Title Town
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    If you watch Rodgers and Young in college or look at them as players, who will be the better player? I'll take Young. He's much better on film than Aaron Rodgers. He's a better passer, runner, athlete. Young is an elite prospect. Rodgers isn't. Rodgers wouldn't go 1st round in this Draft. Young is a top 10 projected pick.

    I've seen nothing good out of Rodgers. If I saw something good out of him then I'd say no to Young as well but the fact is Rodgers has been an unimpressive player.

    He was never a top 10 prospect last year. Young's upside alone makes him great value at #5 and worth the risk especially if Favre comes back and he can sit a year and adjust to a pro style offense.
  18. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    Rodgers was a top OVERALL prospect, not just a top ten :)
  19. porky88
    Offline

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    Title Town
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Rodgers was never a top overall prospect. The 49ers have a cheap owner and were thinking about taking the player that would of demanded less money and because he's an area kid. That's the only reason why Rodgers was mentioned to SF last year and when they pass him that's the reason why he fell. Nobody else saw anything in him.
  20. Zero2Cool
    Offline

    Zero2Cool Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,902
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    Ratings:
    +7 / 1 / -0
    Packer Fan Since:
    1989
    Aaron Rodgers was predicted to go first over all in the draft. It was between he and Alex Smith.
  21. porky88
    Offline

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    Title Town
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Re Read my post. He was never a top prospect. He was never going to go #1 overall. It was always going to be Alex Smith. The only team in the top 20 considering him was the 49ers. Does that make you an elite prospect? Because one team is considering taking someone from the local area? No it doesn't..

    If Alex Smith was in this draft he wouldn't go top 10. Cutler, Young, Leinart, M. Williams, Bush, Ferguson, Davis, Hawk, Huff, and Justice are all better prospects than anybody in last years Draft.
  22. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    no, he was a potential #1, it was talked about all the way up to, and including draft day.
  23. porky88
    Offline

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    Title Town
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Only ONE team in the top 10 was considering him. That's it. SF was rumored to of wanted to trade down for him as well. So does that make you Elite? No it doesn't. That's why he dropped. He isn't an elite prospect. If he was we wouldn't of gotten him at #24.

    Young is a better prospect than Aaron Rodgers. A much better prospect than Rodgers. That's mainly my point and as important as the QB position is I want the best player possible there and if it means drafting Young or Leinart and trading Rodgers. I'm all for it.
  24. tromadz
    Offline

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0
    nobody else in the top 10 was looking for QBs though.
  25. porky88
    Offline

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Location:
    Title Town
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Cleveland, Arizona, Miami, Tennessee.. Just off the top of my head. I'll look for more teams that needed a QB ahead of us.

    Edit: Add Washington at #9. All those teams right there picked in the top 10. 2 of them went QB in this Draft on the First Day to be their starters. Tennessee and Miami needed guys for the future and passed on him. Elite prospects don't fall like that.

Share This Page