D3uc3
Cheesehead
He's very overrated Pryor is who the back need or Ward.
Mock drafts
- Thread starter ivo610
- Start date
He's very overrated Pryor is who the back need or Ward.
FrankRizzo
Cheesehead
Should we comment about it ^there^ or here?
Are we allowed to mention their guess? Here?
Funny it was the Miami Herald but the mock was done by Terez Paylor of the Kansas City Star.
Dylan Hoppe
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2013
- Messages
- 477
- Reaction score
- 14
1. CJ Mosley ILB
2. Terrence brooks S
3. Justin Ellis DT
3. Fiedo TE
4. Adrian Hubbard OLB
5. Terrence Mitchell CB
5. Taylor hart DE
6. Jalen Saunders WR/KR
7. L'Damian Washington WR
Posted this mock before, never got a reply. Changed up my 5th round comp pick. I am so up in the air about our first round selection this year. I don't even want Clinton Dix. IMO he's not interchangeable enough for our defense. Pryor, I like but I don't see him falling or TT trading up. I think Mosley is the safest pick here if he's available. Shazier might be worth taking a risk on based on pure athletic ability (see combine results)
Borland would be a reach which TT doesn't do.
Maybe TT throws a big surprise at us and takes somebody like Kyle Fuller in the 1st and dumps Tramon before training camp.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
2. Terrence brooks S
3. Justin Ellis DT
3. Fiedo TE
4. Adrian Hubbard OLB
5. Terrence Mitchell CB
5. Taylor hart DE
6. Jalen Saunders WR/KR
7. L'Damian Washington WR
Posted this mock before, never got a reply. Changed up my 5th round comp pick. I am so up in the air about our first round selection this year. I don't even want Clinton Dix. IMO he's not interchangeable enough for our defense. Pryor, I like but I don't see him falling or TT trading up. I think Mosley is the safest pick here if he's available. Shazier might be worth taking a risk on based on pure athletic ability (see combine results)
Borland would be a reach which TT doesn't do.
Maybe TT throws a big surprise at us and takes somebody like Kyle Fuller in the 1st and dumps Tramon before training camp.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
It´s beyond my understanding why some people think it is a good idea to have interchangeable safeties. There was noone else playing free safety at the time we had Nick Collins and the Seahawks don´t move Thomas and Chancellor around either.
Dylan Hoppe
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2013
- Messages
- 477
- Reaction score
- 14
Don't necessarily think it's a good idea, it's just how capers works and McCarthy made it clear that he wants Capers to stick around so why not do things to utilize the style of defense he can run? I like Pryor, Ward, and Brooks. I think Dix will be good wherever he goes, Green Bay just isn't the best fit necessarily. Look at what Hyde's role is going to change into this year... We need players that can sub in multiple spots.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
I don't think Capers wants to have interchangeable safeties, it just a matter of fact that they haven't had a stud FS since Collins went down.
I agree that we need players that can play in multiple spots at the DL and to some degree at OLB, not at safety though.
paulcambull
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2014
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 0
Is everyone of the consensus that its either LB or S?
What if a player like Zach Martin falls, do you take him?
What if a player like Zach Martin falls, do you take him?
I don't think we have consensus at all. Even wr and QB have been suggested by some on here.
paulcambull
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2014
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 0
QB and WR? Huh, I would of thought that would be something of little concern.
What the hell would be the reasoning for taking a QB in the first?
What the hell would be the reasoning for taking a QB in the first?
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
TT doesn't draft college guards.
Some suggested to draft a QB if one of the top 3 drops to #21 to maybe get a better pick in return in some years, I don't get it either.
WR could be a position of interest though.
paulcambull
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2014
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 0
I would assume that WR is a position of interest if a player falls?
Or perhaps some like the sound of Cooks on the roster?
Or perhaps some like the sound of Cooks on the roster?
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
I don't see any value in drafting Cooks except if the Packers plan to let Cobb walk away after next season.
I was looking at other mocks and saw those two matched up and thought it was weird
Some on here want to draft a 1st round pick to sit on the bench.
You disagree that this forum would lose it's mind if we passed on haha?
D3uc3
Cheesehead
He won't even be available at 21 and round 1 I doubt we go safety I would hope we did but hey who knows TT frame of mind?
that wasnt what I asked but ok
D3uc3
Cheesehead
I was Dix biggest fan when the season ended until I real
Dix is one player we have no shot at unless we traded up and his is not worth trading up for so your question is illrellevant.
TJV
Lifelong Packers Fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2011
- Messages
- 5,389
- Reaction score
- 954
I don’t know what Capers really wants but he’s been talking the talk of interchangeable safeties for a long time. Having truly interchangeable safeties enables the DC to better disguise the scheme but it reminds me of the saying, “jack of all trades, master of none”. I’d rather have a true FS and true SS and let the backups be interchangeable.
Here’s a quote from Capers shortly after Collins got injured: “Our safeties are basically interchangeable,” defensive coordinator Dom Capers said. “So Morgan’s done all the things Nick did, and Nick’s done all the things Morgan did”.
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com...-meet-specialists-next-week-about-neck-injury
FrankRizzo
Cheesehead
CALVIN PRYOR
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Absolutely agree with wanting to have a true FS and SS. I'm well aware that Capers has been talking about the safeties being interchangeable, I just have a hard time believing him.
Burnett played a total of five career games before Collins went down in 2011 so Capers' quote at that time was ridiculous. On the other side what else was he supposed to say.
TJV
Lifelong Packers Fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2011
- Messages
- 5,389
- Reaction score
- 954
I don't expect Capers or any coach to say anything controversial about a young player but I don't understand the value of the 'interchangeable safety' talk. It's not like he doesn't line up the FS deep and the SS nearer the LOS most of the time, like other DCs. But as I've posted before I care ahellofalot more about what they do vs. what they say.
Dylan Hoppe
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2013
- Messages
- 477
- Reaction score
- 14
I guess I don't understand how having interchangeable safeties could ever be a bad thing? Isn't it just a plus that they could play in multiple places? How could anyone make the argument that versatility is a downfall? That's just crazy.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
In a perfect world teams have a FS that is able to cover the entire field and allows the team to play with a single high safety (Collins was capable of doing that as well as Byrd and Thomas right now). This allows the SS to play close to the LOS and mostly support the run defense or cover RBs or TEs. Normally a safety is best suited to play one of the positions.
If teams don´t have a FS capable of covering the entire field that´s when they become interchangeable as the defense has to line up in a lot of Cover 2 schemes in which both of the safeties line up in deep coverage, normally not playing to the strength of one of their safeties.
So, while versatility is great at some other positions, safety isn´t one of them as teams prefer to have a great FS who lines up there all the time.
Similar threads
Members online
No members online now.
