Packers' GM Ted Thompson discusses day two picks

[Vrill]

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/n...ckers-gm-ted-thompson-discusses-day-two-picks

Here are some of Ted's comments from the press conference.

• "We kinda set a plan, it's a simple plan, but we tried to make sure we got football players and we think we got a few more tonight."
• On what he saw in Quinten Rollins: "Well, you watch him play! You watch his ball skills, he's really kind of remarkable, it's surprising...he's a pretty natural football player."
• On Ty Montgomery and why he's so good in the return game: "He's a very strong runner, very instinctive, has good quickness, all the things you look for. The key thing is his strength level is better than most...(return ability is) always a factor, it wasn't an overriding factor, but it was a factor in how we ranked them."
• Why did you take another wide receiver? "We've got an offensive head coach. The game is that sort of game. Since I've been here, we've had Brett Favre playing quarterback or Aaron Rodgers, so you'd like to give them as many guys to throw to as you can."
• Will the Packers address the inside linebackers before training camp? "We're gonna address that just like we address all the other positions. We're gonna make that as strong as we can. It's fine. (Why do you feel that way?) Because I'm a football guy. I have confidence in the fellows that we have."
• Does that mean that Clay Matthews has to play inside now? "I don't know that it means that. I'm not the defensive coordinator."
• Do you factor in the abilities of your position coaches when making picks (for example Joe Whitt developing Rollins)? "Probably not, not in the draft room at the time. In retrospect, yeah, Joe's that kind of coach and he can take them and make them good or make them better or see how they can be better."
• Why have you not made a trade last year or on the first two days this year? "I do, I kinda like to swap picks around. It hasn't worked where we're ready and the other team's ready and everything's all put to bed. But I'm cool with making trades as long as it makes sense for both parties."

 

[OldSchool101]

• "We kinda set a plan, it's a simple plan, but we tried to make sure we got football players and we think we got a few more tonight. Aha! Well that explains it perfectly.. I feel much better

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

We are completely stacked at WR and secondary now........ How is this bad?

I wanted Brown in the 1st. But having 2 young rookies, that in my mind give us another Hayward, Hyde combo.

Say it..... Sheilds, Hayward, Burnett, Dix, Hyde, Randall, Rollins, Richardson........ Sleep easy knowing our secondary is set

And WR?!?!? We have Jordy, Cobb, Adams, Montgomery, Janis?!?!?!?! 5 guys that will be able to beat down any secondary in the NFL with Rodgers throwing, and Lacy behind him.... Dominant to say the least...

We have 6 more draft picks too.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I think the starting lineup is set. Mathews, and Barrington at ILB. Rodgers/ Quarless at TE. Lacy/Starks at RB.

I still think there are a few DTs that could beat out Guion, and Jones for a starting job... Get two of those guys and i will be grinning ear to ear.

 

[Half Empty]

We are completely stacked at WR and secondary now........ How is this bad?

I wanted Brown in the 1st. But having 2 young rookies, that in my mind give us another Hayward, Hyde combo.

Say it..... Sheilds, Hayward, Burnett, Dix, Hyde, Randall, Rollins, Richardson........ Sleep easy knowing our secondary is set

And WR?!?!? We have Jordy, Cobb, Adams, Montgomery, Janis?!?!?!?! 5 guys that will be able to beat down any secondary in the NFL with Rodgers throwing, and Lacy behind him.... Dominant to say the least...

We have 6 more draft picks too.

On the other hand, I'll probably not sleep easy defensively until (a) Randall, Rollins, (and, to a lesser extent) Hayward and Richardson show something consistently and (b) the front seven shows it can stop the run and get to the passer (no secondary can cover forever).

Basically the same thing with the receivers - after the first three, you listed a rookie with definite negatives and a holdover who had two catches in three games last year. Not a lineup that is going to let me nod off comfortably.

 

[AKCheese]

I am so glad we stuck with our plan to select football players, God you just gotta love some of the stupid schist coaches and GMs feed reporters. I wonder if there's a team intern in charge of coming up with a list of meaningless cliches and then hands TT a stack of 3x5 cards (MM doesn't need any help LOL)

 

[SoonerPack]

Basically the same thing with the receivers - after the first three, you listed a rookie with definite negatives and a holdover who had two catches in three games last year. Not a lineup that is going to let me nod off comfortably.

2 Pro-Bowl receivers and one fast rising player in Adams and you aren't comfortable? If we had 3 Pro Bowlers would that make you more comfortable? I think most GM's in the league would rank our WR core as Top 5 without hesitation. Jordy is one of the best deep ball guys in the league and works the sidelines like Chris Carter. Cobb is a witch over the middle as well as coming out of the backfield. Adams has shown flashes of brilliance and should make a noticeable jump this next season. If you aren't satisfied with what we have I have to question your expectations.

The Half Empty name was well earned on this one...

G P G!!

 

[Half Empty]

2 Pro-Bowl receivers and one fast rising player in Adams and you aren't comfortable? If we had 3 Pro Bowlers would that make you more comfortable? I think most GM's in the league would rank our WR core as Top 5 without hesitation. Jordy is one of the best deep ball guys in the league and works the sidelines like Chris Carter. Cobb is a witch over the middle as well as coming out of the backfield. Adams has shown flashes of brilliance and should make a noticeable jump this next season. If you aren't satisfied with what we have I have to question your expectations.

The Half Empty name was well earned on this one...

G P G!!

If your post had merely listed the top three, nobody, even me, is going to argue that's not a great core. However, you went on to list Montgomery and Janis. The first is being discussed mostly as a running back or returner, and the second had two catches last year - they are the part of your post that doesn't instill confidence and certainly doesn't make for us 'being completely stacked at WR'. I assumed from "5 guys that will be able to beat down any secondary in the NFL" that you considered Montgomery and Janis part of the package. Sorry I misunderstood your post - if we're looking at the top three, then the Pack has about a good a group as anyone.

 

[Half Empty]

We are completely stacked at WR and secondary now........ How is this bad?

I wanted Brown in the 1st. But having 2 young rookies, that in my mind give us another Hayward, Hyde combo.

Say it..... Sheilds, Hayward, Burnett, Dix, Hyde, Randall, Rollins, Richardson........ Sleep easy knowing our secondary is set

And WR?!?!? We have Jordy, Cobb, Adams, Montgomery, Janis?!?!?!?! 5 guys that will be able to beat down any secondary in the NFL with Rodgers throwing, and Lacy behind him.... Dominant to say the least...

We have 6 more draft picks too.

Regarding the exchange of posts following this one, I just found, in your post in the thread on Montgomery, the following - "One injury and we were hurting at WR. Nelson, Cobb, Adams. Any one of them gets hurt, and we have Janis, with nobody to play #4 even if we wanted to... Abberdarius is still a long shot to make the field, especially after his acl. bummer but true."
Really don't see how this evaluation of the WR corps squares with what's quoted above.

 

[MrE]

Well thank goodness he didn't have a complicated plan of taking basketball players and trying to turn them into football players .....

Wait .....

 

[Carl]

Well thank goodness he didn't have a complicated plan of taking basketball players and trying to turn them into football players .....

Wait .....

So he should have taken a player with a lot less upside and talent? If he can play, it doesn't matter if he's had only one year of college football.

 

[Half Empty]

Someone already operating at a high level has less upside, so maybe that isn't a bad idea.

 

[Carl]

Someone already operating at a high level has less upside, so maybe that isn't a bad idea.

But could also have a lower ceiling.

 

[MrE]

So he should have taken a player with a lot less upside and talent? If he can play, it doesn't matter if he's had only one year of college football.

I'm poking fun at TT's answer more than anything. I do not have a problem with our 1/2nd round picks. I have issues with other things TT does, but this is not one of them .