Gm rankings for draft

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
559
I'm not sure I agree with this. Personally I have not seen a whole lot from Love that makes me think he is anything but possibly a serviceable backup. I don't know if I would call him valuable other than his time served and knowledge of the system over someone else. I don't know that his skills put him any further ahead of any number of backups who have been with their teams for as long. As a first round draft pick I would hope what you are saying is true but I just haven't seen it.

So then …

You are admitting that he IS at least…

a memorable backup?? :)
That's optimistic Oldschool, and also pretty funny.
 

Sanguine camper

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
1,353
Reaction score
245
I like Gute's approach of constantly looking for talent in any way possible. I doubt TT would've signed Douglas and Campbell. Sticking with Drayton last year though was a big mistake. Perhaps MLF makes the final decision but Gute needed to convince MFL that the ST were going to kill a promising season. I blame both MFL and Gute for that miserable failure to stick with poor performance. I also think that trading up to get Love was a big mistake. Maybe the timing was ok, but Love had too many red flags as a collegiate player against midling competition to pour that much draft capital into a backup. Whether Gute turns out to be a great or just good GM will depend on his ability to learn from his mistakes. He was able to patch up his relationship with AR which bodes well for his ability to adapt. After five years, I give him a thumbs up!
 

InGuteWeTrust

Banned
Banned
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
221
Reaction score
13
I like Gute's approach of constantly looking for talent in any way possible. I doubt TT would've signed Douglas and Campbell. Sticking with Drayton last year though was a big mistake. Perhaps MLF makes the final decision but Gute needed to convince MFL that the ST were going to kill a promising season. I blame both MFL and Gute for that miserable failure to stick with poor performance. I also think that trading up to get Love was a big mistake. Maybe the timing was ok, but Love had too many red flags as a collegiate player against midling competition to pour that much draft capital into a backup. Whether Gute turns out to be a great or just good GM will depend on his ability to learn from his mistakes. He was able to patch up his relationship with AR which bodes well for his ability to adapt. After five years, I give him a thumbs up!
I don't want my GM trying to "convince" my head coach about decisions with his coaching staff. If a GM tries to do the head coaches job as well it will be a disaster fast.

The J-Love pick was a good one. I am not going to go into all the reasons why again here, but the Packers are set at QB in the present and the future better than 85% of the teams in the league. That means Gute did the right thing.

Watch J-Love this preseason and tell me if you still think he sucks after Tom Clements has had his hands on him for a few months. He has a bright future in the NFL whether you care to admit it or not.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
559
I don't even know what to say I am laughing so hard. Maybe a song will lighten up the tension here today:
You must be logged in to see this image or video!
OMG that is funny! And I'm old enough to remember that song and it's great! Back to the comments! Thanks Packer! Great stuff!
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
559
I like Gute's approach of constantly looking for talent in any way possible. I doubt TT would've signed Douglas and Campbell. Sticking with Drayton last year though was a big mistake. Perhaps MLF makes the final decision but Gute needed to convince MFL that the ST were going to kill a promising season. I blame both MFL and Gute for that miserable failure to stick with poor performance. I also think that trading up to get Love was a big mistake. Maybe the timing was ok, but Love had too many red flags as a collegiate player against midling competition to pour that much draft capital into a backup. Whether Gute turns out to be a great or just good GM will depend on his ability to learn from his mistakes. He was able to patch up his relationship with AR which bodes well for his ability to adapt. After five years, I give him a thumbs up!
Agreed. He did make a mistake using a first and fourth round pick on, at best, a backup QB. You can bet that if he could trade Love to get some value back, he would. No one wants Love for anything more than a seventh round pick, if that.

But after that rough patch, and after sorting out his relationship with Rodgers, Gluten has done a fine job. Another poster said it, but TT never would have signed Campbell or Douglas, or the Smiths, Turner, and Amos, or draft as well (other than Love).

So Gluten has done well. The ultimate proof for him, MLF, and the team will be a SB ring.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
longtimefan

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
23,149
Reaction score
2,658
Location
Milwaukee
If you think being a mod on a Packers fan forum makes you a tough guy in life then yes.

I don't care if you ban me. I will respond in kind to little keyboard warriors here.

I'm glad we are clear.
Banned

I never said I wasnt a tough guy in person. You just ASSumed that

Glad I made it clear
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,777
Reaction score
1,092
I'm not sure I agree with this. Personally I have not seen a whole lot from Love that makes me think he is anything but possibly a serviceable backup. I don't know if I would call him valuable other than his time served and knowledge of the system over someone else. I don't know that his skills put him any further ahead of any number of backups who have been with their teams for as long. As a first round draft pick I would hope what you are saying is true but I just haven't seen it.

So then …

You are admitting that he IS at least…

a memorable backup?? :)
Memorable? lets just say there are a few people on here who will never let us forget Jordan Love.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
559
More than a few.
Yeah I don't keep score but would say a significant majority think it was a wasted first-round pick. And another majority of those commenters see it as a desperation pick by Gluten, assuming incorrectly that Rodgers was on his way down.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,376
Reaction score
2,277
You're making your statement out of context. The context was about why Gutekunst would have drafted a QB in the 1st round. InGuteWeTrust made a good argument for it above. Everyone else was pointing to Rodgers' falling numbers and I added in that he did have a recent injury history. You decided to make your statement in the context of 2022. Yes, the broken collarbones appear to have been one-time flukes, but at the time it was concerning. The calf also affected his play, so you carving that out by saying he didn't miss any games is misleading in terms of the conversation. Rodgers' play was declining, he had suffered several injuries in recent years (at that point), and any reasonable GM should have concluded the same as Gutekunst that his aging QB was starting to fall off. Combine that with a PBA perspective and one can see how the Packers get the Love pick.

Rodgers' calf injury happened in 2014, I guarantee it wasn't a factor in Gutekunst's decision to draft Love in 2020.

But actually none of it matters anyway. Gutekunst felt the need to trade up in the first round to select Love two years ago because he concluded Rodgers was in decline after two subpar seasons based on his standards. I didn't like the move from the get-go and two years later it seems Gutekunst was the one being wrong about it.

As a side note, there's not a single general manager in the entire league solely using a BPA approach to the draft. While there are rare occasions of it happening mostly they select players presenting the best value with positions of need definitely factoring into a decision.

It wasn't a total disaster, they have a serviceable backup QB in Love.

At this point I don't consider Love a serviceable backup yet.

I just don’t agree with the dog and pony Show of trying to defend that opinion by grasping in the dark for excuses to support disagreeing with it.

What's actually happening is that Packers fans who defend the selection of Love are coming up with random reasons as to why it was a decent idea to select him in the first place.

Even with that Selection, it’s highly likely a Rookie WR at #24 overall in 2020 pushes us to a SB victory.

There's no guarantee any rookie would have been able to contribute to a Super Bowl run. But it would have been awfully tough for any other prospect to have less of an impact than Love who actually wasn't even active once in 2020.

Love should get more work earlier this season.

Wait a moment, do you expect Love to get any snaps early n the regular season???

So hopefully competition for the Packers' backup QB is wide open during training camp. I certainly have no attachment to Love, first round draftee or not.

I'm a bit confused. As mentioned above you consider Love a serviceable backup quarterback but now you want an open competition for the spot?

Yeah I don't keep score but would say a significant majority think it was a wasted first-round pick. And another majority of those commenters see it as a desperation pick by Gluten, assuming incorrectly that Rodgers was on his way down.

As I've mentioned in the past, I believe Gutekunst tried to outsmart himself by forcing the selection of a quarterback in a similar situation Thompson did with Rodgers. Unfortunately he didn't realize the Packers weren't even close to being in the same one as in 2005.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
559
Rodgers' calf injury happened in 2014, I guarantee it wasn't a factor in Gutekunst's decision to draft Love in 2020.

But actually none of it matters anyway. Gutekunst felt the need to trade up in the first round to select Love two years ago because he concluded Rodgers was in decline after two subpar seasons based on his standards. I didn't like the move from the get-go and two years later it seems Gutekunst was the one being wrong about it.

As a side note, there's not a single general manager in the entire league solely using a BPA approach to the draft. While there are rare occasions of it happening mostly they select players presenting the best value with positions of need definitely factoring into a decision.



At this point I don't consider Love a serviceable backup yet.



What's actually happening is that Packers fans who defend the selection of Love are coming up with random reasons as to why it was a decent idea to select him in the first place.



There's no guarantee any rookie would have been able to contribute to a Super Bowl run. But it would have been awfully tough for any other prospect to have less of an impact than Love who actually wasn't even active once in 2020.



Wait a moment, do you expect Love to get any snaps early n the regular season???



I'm a bit confused. As mentioned above you consider Love a serviceable backup quarterback but now you want an open competition for the spot?



As I've mentioned in the past, I believe Gutekunst tried to outsmart himself by forcing the selection of a quarterback in a similar situation Thompson did with Rodgers. Unfortunately he didn't realize the Packers weren't even close to being in the same one as in 2005.
To clear up my comments - yeah if no one else comes along, Love is serviceable as a backup. Not great, not even average, just someone who can keep the offense going on a slimmed down game plan. And in that light, competition is good. It's almost always good for backups and even starters (Crosby, foe example, or any of the RBs).

Did Gluten try to outsmart himself by picking Love? Not sure what that means. I think he greatly underestimated Rodgers' future abilities and chose Love out of desperation. I don't know what he was thinking. I saw Rodgers off his game due to MM's stale game plan, not a deterioration of skills. It doesn't matter. It was a lousy pick. Fortunately he's done a lot better since with personnel.
 
Last edited:

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,777
Reaction score
1,092
But actually none of it matters anyway. Gutekunst felt the need to trade up in the first round to select Love two years ago because he concluded Rodgers was in decline after two subpar seasons based on his standards. I didn't like the move from the get-go and two years later it seems Gutekunst was the one being wrong about it.

At this point I don't consider Love a serviceable backup yet.

What's actually happening is that Packers fans who defend the selection of Love are coming up with random reasons as to why it was a decent idea to select him in the first place.

There's no guarantee any rookie would have been able to contribute to a Super Bowl run. But it would have been awfully tough for any other prospect to have less of an impact than Love who actually wasn't even active once in 2020.

As I've mentioned in the past, I believe Gutekunst tried to outsmart himself by forcing the selection of a quarterback in a similar situation Thompson did with Rodgers. Unfortunately he didn't realize the Packers weren't even close to being in the same one as in 2005.
Concluded he was in decline or thought there was a possibility of him being in decline. There is a difference and either way a good GM would address that possibility. Gute did that. You are right on one point. He was wrong in his assessment of Rodgers' abilities.

I'd agree with your assessment of Love being a serviceable.

Random reasons? How about legitimate reasons? "Our QBs stats have gone down the last 2 years. There is a possibility he may be in decline, I had better address the situation." What I see happening is people who didn't like the pick using the power of hindsight as proof that there was no legitimate reason to take a QB. No one had the benefit of hindsight when the pick was made unless you count the hindsight of 2 seasons worth of declining stats. Oh wait, you can't count that because that would blow up your argument that there was no reason to take a QB.

I agree with this but a GM has to think beyond the upcoming season as well. Yes, a rookie may have contributed beyond the next season but QB is the most important position and if you believe there is a possibility that you may need a new one that becomes a pretty high priority. The highest? Maybe not but GMs have to adapt as the draft unfolds. There are many who think that if Jefferson had been available he would have been the pick. I don't know if that is true or not but if so it shows that Gute was not dialed in on Love.

The situations may not have been identical but the were similar. In both cases the Packers were faced with the possibility that in the near future they may be without their HOF level QB. Retirement in Favre's case and performance decline in Rodgers' The biggest difference as I see it was in the quality of the player selected. Rodgers had been talked about as a possible first overall pick while everyone knew Love would need some development. Did he need to take a QB in the first? No, he could have waited but when a solution to a perceived need was available he took it which is something a GM should do.

I don't have a problem with anyone saying it was a mistake to pick Love, either when it happened or now given the way things have played out. I will say that myself. At the time I would have preferred a different pick but I could see why Gute thought he needed to make the choice he did. Certainly now I am thinking it was a mistake given the way things have developed. My biggest problem with your argument is that you keep insisting there was no legitimate reason to draft a QB in the first place and I think that is wrong. You have said that Gute should have known Rodgers would bounce back (I'm not going to look for the post but you pretty much said as much) so there was no need for concern. I say that without a crystal ball there was no way for Gute to know if 2 years of declined stats might continue. If a GM sees a position that is potentially in decline he should address it and Gute did that. Was he wrong? Probably, but he wasn't sitting on his hands.

And before you say anything yeah I'm a little upset with him for not addressing the WR situation sooner as well. Of course prior to this year I don't know that he thought he would be without Adams so the need may not have felt as pressing but he still should have been dealing with it and replacing the underlings.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
559
Concluded he was in decline or thought there was a possibility of him being in decline. There is a difference and either way a good GM would address that possibility. Gute did that. You are right on one point. He was wrong in his assessment of Rodgers' abilities.

I'd agree with your assessment of Love being a serviceable.

Random reasons? How about legitimate reasons? "Our QBs stats have gone down the last 2 years. There is a possibility he may be in decline, I had better address the situation." What I see happening is people who didn't like the pick using the power of hindsight as proof that there was no legitimate reason to take a QB. No one had the benefit of hindsight when the pick was made unless you count the hindsight of 2 seasons worth of declining stats. Oh wait, you can't count that because that would blow up your argument that there was no reason to take a QB.

I agree with this but a GM has to think beyond the upcoming season as well. Yes, a rookie may have contributed beyond the next season but QB is the most important position and if you believe there is a possibility that you may need a new one that becomes a pretty high priority. The highest? Maybe not but GMs have to adapt as the draft unfolds. There are many who think that if Jefferson had been available he would have been the pick. I don't know if that is true or not but if so it shows that Gute was not dialed in on Love.

The situations may not have been identical but the were similar. In both cases the Packers were faced with the possibility that in the near future they may be without their HOF level QB. Retirement in Favre's case and performance decline in Rodgers' The biggest difference as I see it was in the quality of the player selected. Rodgers had been talked about as a possible first overall pick while everyone knew Love would need some development. Did he need to take a QB in the first? No, he could have waited but when a solution to a perceived need was available he took it which is something a GM should do.

I don't have a problem with anyone saying it was a mistake to pick Love, either when it happened or now given the way things have played out. I will say that myself. At the time I would have preferred a different pick but I could see why Gute thought he needed to make the choice he did. Certainly now I am thinking it was a mistake given the way things have developed. My biggest problem with your argument is that you keep insisting there was no legitimate reason to draft a QB in the first place and I think that is wrong. You have said that Gute should have known Rodgers would bounce back (I'm not going to look for the post but you pretty much said as much) so there was no need for concern. I say that without a crystal ball there was no way for Gute to know if 2 years of declined stats might continue. If a GM sees a position that is potentially in decline he should address it and Gute did that. Was he wrong? Probably, but he wasn't sitting on his hands.

And before you say anything yeah I'm a little upset with him for not addressing the WR situation sooner as well. Of course prior to this year I don't know that he thought he would be without Adams so the need may not have felt as pressing but he still should have been dealing with it and replacing the underlings.
That's a good description sschind. If Gluten really thought Rodgers was in decline, and I really think he did, then he did the right thing and took the best available QB. Did he have to trade up? Would Love have been there in rounds 2 or 3? Who knows. The point is that Gluten did what he thought was best for the team. His intentions were right. His decision was wrong. A closer analysis would have revealed that MM's game plan had gone stale, he had pretty much lost the team, and Rodgers' (and others) play reflected that.

The other thing about that draft was the wealth of WR talent, and yet none picked by GB. As I recall, even though there were a lot of talented WRs, they came off the board in bunches. It was similar to this year's first round. The Packers didn't have a first round WR on their board at #22 or #28 and they went, wisely I think, with defense.

So in 2020, each time they were up, the remaining WR talent would have been a stretch or required a trade up or back. That's easier said then done and the Packers came away without any WRs. It's just the way the board fell. Gluten knew he had Adams to fall back on anyway.
 

paulska

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
112
Reaction score
14
Location
Nova Scotia, Canada
I'm late to this party and been a long while since I posted anything in this forum.

Reading this thread from start to finish, the summary I take away from the balance of posts (being fair/consistent with the ideas of various posters) is:
1. Gute has been consistently effective at the top of the draft
2. Gute could be better in finding and developing talent selected in the 3rd round and later
3. Gute has been effective in pro scouting and FA acquisitions (both big ticket and budget)
4. Could have been quicker to push MLF to transition special teams leadership/coaching
5. Singularly most polarizing decision was to spend draft capital to obtain Love

On the Love question, here are my thoughts:
Rodgers had been good, but wasn't performing at that MVP level. The rumours about wrapping up in GB had been floating for a couple years by that draft too. He did have the collarbone issues despite having been otherwise durable and healthy, and it wasn't clear whether those injuries would further decrease or limit his level of play from getting back to MVP form.

Love was drafted because there was both smoke that Rodgers could pull rank and demand out, and some legitimate concerns about whether he could get back to the elite play he'd previously delivered.

I remember when Rodgers was drafted. TT was booed in many corners because Favre was a legend still playing at a high level, but the "will he or won't he play" rumbles were growing loud and an annual source of controversy.

Once Rodgers was drafted, whether it motivated Favre or not, his play didn't fall off and he appeared to grab tightly of the QB1 job here again, which was good for the team. In the meantime, Rodgers played sparingly, and when he did? He didn't exactly exude greatness. Once Favre was done and Rodgers was the man, it took some time before he looked like he could be the guy and approach Favre's level. He had lots of early doubters.

I agree that no one can project definitively whether Love turns into a player who can consistently approach the level of play that Rodgers has generally delivered. But there are some striking similarities in their development journey.

Both will have enjoyed significant/extended time to learn behind a QB playing and preparing at an elite level. Both will have benefited from significant/extended time being coached up in the team's offensive system and philosophy under an early tenure coach doing creative, effective things that delivered results. Both will have been exposed in a limited way to playing time without the full weight of expectation as a starter to complicate being on the field or in the huddle.

It's ONLY my sense, but I think that being patient with Love will have similar benefits for him and the team that we've witnessed with Rodgers. Whether or not he can meet the level that we've enjoyed under Rodgers remains to be seen, but I tend to think that he will be firmly prepared for that test when it arrives, and that there are worse spots to be as a franchise dealing with the question of "can we succeed after an elite QB is gone" than where we'll be with Love- imagine having only the hope of trading for a huge dollar FA or soon to be FA. That comes at a steep premium for the team. The list of teams that mortgage the present and future to get a near elite or elite QB and get over immediately is short. Only one I can think of top of mind is Tampa, and let's not forget that Brady didn't look like a worldbeater on his way out of NE either.

Thanks for the thread all. Stay safe out there.
 
Last edited:

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,376
Reaction score
2,277
To clear up my comments - yeah if no one else comes along, Love is serviceable as a backup. Not great, not even average, just someone who can keep the offense going on a slimmed down game plan.

Love is either a serviceable backup quarterback or not. I haven't seen anything so far that makes me believe he is at this point.

Did Gluten try to outsmart himself by picking Love? Not sure what that means.

I think Gutekunst desperately wanted to duplicate Thompson's approach of replacing a HOF quarterback and forced the issue by selecting Love.

Concluded he was in decline or thought there was a possibility of him being in decline. There is a difference and either way a good GM would address that possibility. Gute did that. You are right on one point. He was wrong in his assessment of Rodgers' abilities.

In my opinion Gutekunst concluded Rodgers was in decline, otherwise there would have been no reason to spend a first rounder on his replacement.

Random reasons? How about legitimate reasons? "Our QBs stats have gone down the last 2 years. There is a possibility he may be in decline, I had better address the situation." What I see happening is people who didn't like the pick using the power of hindsight as proof that there was no legitimate reason to take a QB. No one had the benefit of hindsight when the pick was made unless you count the hindsight of 2 seasons worth of declining stats. Oh wait, you can't count that because that would blow up your argument that there was no reason to take a QB.

For the umpteenth time, I'm not using hindsight to criticize the selection of Love as I was furious about the pick from the get-go. Rodgers' numbers dropped for several reasons in the two seasons leading up to the 2020 draft but it should have been pretty obvious to the front office that it wasn't because of his talent regressing.

I would have been fine with spending that fourth rounder traded away to move up for Love to select a QB to take a chance on a prospect who presents some upside but definitely not a first rounder.

The situations may not have been identical but the were similar. In both cases the Packers were faced with the possibility that in the near future they may be without their HOF level QB. Retirement in Favre's case and performance decline in Rodgers'.

The situations couldn't have been more different. The Packers found themselves in a rebuilding mode entering the 2005 draft with a quarterback that had threatened to retire while the team came off making it to the NFCCG the previous season with Rodgers having made it clear to everybody who listened that he wanted to play his entire career for the Packers and well into his 40s.
My biggest problem with your argument is that you keep insisting there was no legitimate reason to draft a QB in the first place and I think that is wrong.

Once again, I would have been fine with drafting a quarterback but definitely not in the first round after trading up to make it work.

That's a good description sschind. If Gluten really thought Rodgers was in decline, and I really think he did, then he did the right thing and took the best available QB. A closer analysis would have revealed that MM's game plan had gone stale, he had pretty much lost the team, and Rodgers' (and others) play reflected that.

Gutekunst didn't do the right thing as he was wrong in evaluating Rodgers. With that being said I'm absolutely convinced he analyzed the situation thoroughly but still made a mistake by concluding their franchise quarterback was in decline.

So in 2020, each time they were up, the remaining WR talent would have been a stretch or required a trade up or back. That's easier said then done and the Packers came away without any WRs. It's just the way the board fell. Gluten knew he had Adams to fall back on anyway.

The Packers could have stayed pat at #30 and selected a wide receiver Higgins or Pittman and would have been better off.

On the Love question, here are my thoughts:
Rodgers had been good, but wasn't performing at that MVP level. The rumours about wrapping up in GB had been floating for a couple years by that draft too.

Love was drafted because there was both smoke that Rodgers could pull rank and demand out, and some legitimate concerns about whether he could get back to the elite play he'd previously delivered.

Rodgers was pretty adamant about wanting to finish his career with the Packers at the point of the 2020 draft.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
3,892
Reaction score
533
Once again, I would have been fine with drafting a quarterback but definitely not in the first round after trading up to make it work.
You sound like drafting a QB in any round will result in the same competence as in the first round. I guess you think they all just need time and coaching.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
27,376
Reaction score
2,277
You sound like drafting a QB in any round will result in the same competence as in the first round. I guess you think they all just need time and coaching.

I fully understand the chances of selecting an impact player are significantly better in the first round than later in the draft. But there was no need to select a quarterback in the first round while having an elite starter on the roster though.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
3,698
Reaction score
559
Love is either a serviceable backup quarterback or not. I haven't seen anything so far that makes me believe he is at this point.



I think Gutekunst desperately wanted to duplicate Thompson's approach of replacing a HOF quarterback and forced the issue by selecting Love.



In my opinion Gutekunst concluded Rodgers was in decline, otherwise there would have been no reason to spend a first rounder on his replacement.



For the umpteenth time, I'm not using hindsight to criticize the selection of Love as I was furious about the pick from the get-go. Rodgers' numbers dropped for several reasons in the two seasons leading up to the 2020 draft but it should have been pretty obvious to the front office that it wasn't because of his talent regressing.

I would have been fine with spending that fourth rounder traded away to move up for Love to select a QB to take a chance on a prospect who presents some upside but definitely not a first rounder.



The situations couldn't have been more different. The Packers found themselves in a rebuilding mode entering the 2005 draft with a quarterback that had threatened to retire while the team came off making it to the NFCCG the previous season with Rodgers having made it clear to everybody who listened that he wanted to play his entire career for the Packers and well into his 40s.


Once again, I would have been fine with drafting a quarterback but definitely not in the first round after trading up to make it work.



Gutekunst didn't do the right thing as he was wrong in evaluating Rodgers. With that being said I'm absolutely convinced he analyzed the situation thoroughly but still made a mistake by concluding their franchise quarterback was in decline.



The Packers could have stayed pat at #30 and selected a wide receiver Higgins or Pittman and would have been better off.



Rodgers was pretty adamant about wanting to finish his career with the Packers at the point of the 2020 draft.
Didn't realize that Higgins or Pittman we're still there at #30. Ouch.

And as far as Love, we can go back and forth on what serviceable means. If Rodgers goes down, the team is in big trouble. And I'm not sure if there is another backup QB out there who would make much difference. I think Love would have a better chance in another environment, but even that is a leap of faith.

And maybe Gluten did think he was reaching for glory by selecting Love as TT selected Rodgers. That was a foolish move. I'm glad he got better with personnel moves since.

Love was a lousy pick. End of story for me.
 
Top