PackinMSP
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2018
- Messages
- 797
- Reaction score
- 56
Sorry if this has been posted before...
Thoughts???
Thoughts???
OR... use that pick for a stud OT who'll start for the next 8-10 years? The wagon is hitched to AR for the next 4 years, put very good pieces all around him (and the future next-guy).Let’s trade it for a first and a second two years from now
Who would trade a future first and second round pick for what will probably be a pick at around #29 or later? If you find someone, let the Packers know and hopefully that someone is the worst team in the league in 2 years.Let’s trade it for a first and a second two years from now
I think because of that huge financial investment, you don't take a QB at all. If a really good one falls to you in the first round, take advantage of a team that really wants him and pick up some draft capital. If Kizer isn't a good enough back-up for 4-5 years, find a vet who is. The problem I have with "projects" or using a high pick, they probably aren't good enough to be a first year or maybe even not a good second year back up to #12 and then what do you do in year 4/5 if Rodgers still has another few years in him? Ride the next few years with Rodgers, when his retirement is a year or 2 away, go all in with a new rookie QB.The only way you take a QB is if Rodgers falls to you. You don’t move up to get a QB after you just made an huge financial investment in your QB. Once you’ve invested in your QB you invest in building the team around him.
It's a year too soon to be thinking about succession. You'd want to be thinking about starting the successor in his year 2 or 3.
I didn't fell like delving into it too far, but yes, you don't really take one at all. Of course if I was looking at a Jamal Reynolds or Aaron Rodgers with that later 1st round pick in rating and talent, I'd take the Rodgers all day long. Even now with one on the roster. But that happens what? every 20 years or so in the draft? I have a feeling there will be plenty of highly rated guys available to us at all sorts of positions besides QB that will make it a moot point.I think because of that huge financial investment, you don't take a QB at all. If a really good one falls to you in the first round, take advantage of a team that really wants him and pick up some draft capital. If Kizer isn't a good enough back-up for 4-5 years, find a vet who is. The problem I have with "projects" or using a high pick, they probably aren't good enough to be a first year or maybe even not a good second year back up to #12 and then what do you do in year 4/5 if Rodgers still has another few years in him? Ride the next few years with Rodgers, when his retirement is a year or 2 away, go all in with a new rookie QB.
Rodgers replacement should be just getting on campus this spring or next fall at the earliest. Just took his team deep into his state high school playoffs.
Wisconsin? Where QB careers go to die? I'm ignoring Wilson as he wasn't in Madison long enough to get infested with it.
No doubt that Wisconsin has never been the NFL pipeline for QB's and I am sure that, along with offenses that historically live and die with the running game doesn't help in recruiting top 100 talent at QB either. I'm hopeful that Mertz changes this and Chryst finally sees the benefit to have a decent passing attack to compliment the usual great run game. #OnWisconsinWisconsin? Where QB careers go to die? I'm ignoring Wilson as he wasn't in Madison long enough to get infested with it.
I didn't fell like delving into it too far, but yes, you don't really take one at all. Of course if I was looking at a Jamal Reynolds or Aaron Rodgers with that later 1st round pick in rating and talent, I'd take the Rodgers all day long. Even now with one on the roster. But that happens what? every 20 years or so in the draft? I have a feeling there will be plenty of highly rated guys available to us at all sorts of positions besides QB that will make it a moot point.
That could easily be true, but hey, if after 3 years of development we have Aaron Rodgers all over again, i'm OK with it. I wouldn't be ok with it being a kirk cousins or Stafford or Mariota, or something like that though. So i guess what i'm saying is the odds are pretty small To me, QB is just too important of a position to let those guys go to someone else, like a competitor. They don't help "now", but could result in the HOF's replacement or result in a trade and multiple high draft picks to build with after the HOF QB is gone.With Rodgers being under contract for another five seasons it might even be a wasted pick drafting an equally talented quarterback that drops in the draft.
That could easily be true, but hey, if after 3 years of development we have Aaron Rodgers all over again, i'm OK with it. I wouldn't be ok with it being a kirk cousins or Stafford or Mariota, or something like that though. So i guess what i'm saying is the odds are pretty small To me, QB is just too important of a position to let those guys go to someone else, like a competitor. They don't help "now", but could result in the HOF's replacement or result in a trade and multiple high draft picks to build with after the HOF QB is gone.
But this is like talking about me winning the lottery. Pointless because the odds are worse than Lloyd Christmas's chance at nailing Mary Swimmy, Swammy, Samsonite?