Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
CBS Sports calls out Packers lies regarding Jordan Love
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="OldSchool101" data-source="post: 878322" data-attributes="member: 10086"><p>The thing that puzzled me a bit was not that we DIDNT pick at WR, we’ve all been discussing the QB prospect for replacement for several years now. Its likely several factors together that left everyone uneasy.</p><p></p><p>The thing that confounded me personally is not any ONE thing. It’s a combination of:</p><p>1. drafting a QB 1-2 years earlier than I expected</p><p>2. trading away a 4th rounder to get him.</p><p>3. restructuring our current QB to a massive long term deal that locks us for 2-3 years minimum.</p><p>4. not drafting a player in the top #100 overall at WR, LB, DT or OT. Which I think many of us can agree were what? 4 of our top position needs (give or take). Puts us at a slight disadvantage at all 4 groups going forward.</p><p></p><p>1. In my mind we should’ve been looking at QB early in 2021 or 2022 based on Rodgers contract in order to maximize the cost verses benefits of a QB Rookie contract.</p><p>2. I was entirely o.k. and expecting us to be aggressive by trading up a day 3 selection (or even two selections). But it made more sense to me to use that to get earlier into day 2 at any of the above positions. As an example, we now know it would’ve easily landed us a solid WR in round 2.</p><p>3. Our earliest contract out at QB is 2022 and our most economical out is 2023. Kissing away a HOF QB and $17 mil still doesn’t make smart financial sense even if they end up being right with Love. That’s a deal you’ll miss at more than make up. It’s taking a hit in the game of Blackjack holding 18.</p><p>4. If we gambled and waited for Love at #30 and he got picked at #26-#29. We could’ve traded back slightly? We easily had our choice of 2 of DT, WR, OT, DT and a host of other position locked down.</p><p></p><p>All that said. The more I review WR, the less concerned I am. I do have slight reservations at LB and moreso at DT, but I don’t believe either are as dire as they were week 2 in 2019 (after losing Oren and Raven). We have both players back plus added a thumper in Kamal Martin and a much more versatile player in Kirksey (he puts Martinez to shame in pass coverage but with very very little lost as a tackling machine if anything).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="OldSchool101, post: 878322, member: 10086"] The thing that puzzled me a bit was not that we DIDNT pick at WR, we’ve all been discussing the QB prospect for replacement for several years now. Its likely several factors together that left everyone uneasy. The thing that confounded me personally is not any ONE thing. It’s a combination of: 1. drafting a QB 1-2 years earlier than I expected 2. trading away a 4th rounder to get him. 3. restructuring our current QB to a massive long term deal that locks us for 2-3 years minimum. 4. not drafting a player in the top #100 overall at WR, LB, DT or OT. Which I think many of us can agree were what? 4 of our top position needs (give or take). Puts us at a slight disadvantage at all 4 groups going forward. 1. In my mind we should’ve been looking at QB early in 2021 or 2022 based on Rodgers contract in order to maximize the cost verses benefits of a QB Rookie contract. 2. I was entirely o.k. and expecting us to be aggressive by trading up a day 3 selection (or even two selections). But it made more sense to me to use that to get earlier into day 2 at any of the above positions. As an example, we now know it would’ve easily landed us a solid WR in round 2. 3. Our earliest contract out at QB is 2022 and our most economical out is 2023. Kissing away a HOF QB and $17 mil still doesn’t make smart financial sense even if they end up being right with Love. That’s a deal you’ll miss at more than make up. It’s taking a hit in the game of Blackjack holding 18. 4. If we gambled and waited for Love at #30 and he got picked at #26-#29. We could’ve traded back slightly? We easily had our choice of 2 of DT, WR, OT, DT and a host of other position locked down. All that said. The more I review WR, the less concerned I am. I do have slight reservations at LB and moreso at DT, but I don’t believe either are as dire as they were week 2 in 2019 (after losing Oren and Raven). We have both players back plus added a thumper in Kamal Martin and a much more versatile player in Kirksey (he puts Martinez to shame in pass coverage but with very very little lost as a tackling machine if anything). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
The Indiana Bears?
Latest: milani
21 minutes ago
NFL Discussions
The Crew - 2026
Latest: weeds
51 minutes ago
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: OldSchool101
Today at 2:51 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: OldSchool101
Today at 1:58 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Movies and TV shows Thread
Latest: Poppa San
Today at 11:57 AM
Movies and Entertainment
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
CBS Sports calls out Packers lies regarding Jordan Love
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
