The Point of the Draft Picks

[Dantés]

I wouldn't have considered selecting a prospect at another position who could have the potential to help the team this season stupid even if that move hadn't worked out.

On the other side Gutekunst trading up to select a quarterback while having a future HOFer on the roster with four years left on his current deal who has repeatedly mentioned he wants to play into his 40s is stupid.

The move has the potential to be brilliant but should be considered an utter failure if it doesn't work out

Translation:

If the FO did what I wanted them to do, it was smart no matter what.

Since the FO did what I didn't want them to do, it's only smart if it works.

That's some grading scale you've got there!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Translation:

If the FO did what I wanted them to do, it was smart no matter what.

Since the FO did what I didn't want them to do, it's only smart if it works.

That's some grading scale you've got there!

You have terrible translation skills.

 

[jon]

But the fact of the matter is that there was a vacancy at WR, a vacancy at ILB, several position groups which could have been improved overall, yet the team drafted a player at the only one in which they could get no value out of for several years. That's stupid.

I wouldn't say 'stupid', but this certainly is the fact of the matter. The GM does not seem to filling gaps to win now with a rare talent at QB.

Ron Wolf said in one interview, maybe more than one, that he felt he did badly as a GM because GB won only one super bowl with Favre. I can see Gutekunst saying the same in a few years.

 

[Dantés]

You have terrible translation skills.

Ok, so you go ahead and explain how my post wasn't an exact summation of what you said in the first place.

Spoiler-- you can't.

 

[Fredrik87]

Ok, so you go ahead and explain how my post wasn't an exact summation of what you said in the first place.

Spoiler-- you can't.

Isn't it obvious selecting a player that has decent odds of making a impact right away and most expect to be a good player doesn't always work out but at least the basis for making the move has some basic logic to it so it can always be understood.

Drafting a player who sucked against against bad competition and was even worse when he played a good team at a position that you already have a HOF player at with a contract that makes him difficult to move; doesn't have that same basic logic to it so if the move works out then yes its genius but if not then it's just a move that went against what every bit of common sense would tell you to do that went horribly wrong as would be expected by most.

 

[Dantés]

Isn't it obvious selecting a player that has decent odds of making a impact right away and most expect to be a good player doesn't always work out but at least the basis for making the move has some basic logic to it so it can always be understood.

Drafting a player who sucked against against bad competition and was even worse when he played a good team at a position that you already have a HOF player at with a contract that makes him difficult to move; doesn't have that same basic logic to it so if the move works out then yes its genius but if not then it's just a move that went against what every bit of common sense would tell you to do that went horribly wrong as would be expected by most.

There-- you nailed it.

Either you see the basis for taking Love and understand the reasoning, or you don't. So you either think it's stupid, or you don't.

What was said in the first place (and what you repeat here) was that it's stupid if it doesn't work, but brilliant if it does.

That's what's stupid.

 

[OldSchool101]

With Rodgers championship window clsoing fast the Packers should do everything to surround him with talent and take advantage of having a future HOF quarterback while it lasts. There's no way to achieve that by selecting his successor two years early.

I can appreciate that argument.
In return I’ll offer you something.. It doesn’t have anything to do with Jordan or Josiah or AJ directly. It has everything to do with winning and the road to getting there.
Its absolutely imperative to allow your GM/HC flexibility (especially when you are making drastic changes to a system/staff). You don’t automatically jump ship on your GM because he’s got a plan that doesn’t perfectly align with one (or even a group) of your employees/fans.

Now I’ve learned the hard way. The toughest part of being in a management position (which I’ve been in for 31 years in multiple capacities) is feelings always get hurt along the the way.
No one ever agrees with you until they see the positive results. (Is 14-3 positive? I think so)
Then suddenly everyone wants to know how you did it? Everyone wants to be your friend again because they unknowingly realized they mis-judged you along the way. They questioned your process.. before they processed their question so to speak.

If you put a capable person in charge and allow others to question their authority or diminish their reputation at every turn.. you lose every time.

I don’t agree with every move Gutekunst makes any more than you do Captain. But the level of criticism he’s taking this early in the process from so many fans only speaks one thing to me. They’ve never been in his shoes or respect the level of difficulty and intestinal fortitude that goes into ship building.

Now you can badger Gute all you want. You can argue every time he goes to pee. But it’s all premature complaining until he’s been given ample chance to prove or disprove himself. And guess what? All the ridicule until that point isn’t going to amount to a hill of beans.. it will only frustrate you more and raise your anxiety to a new level.

Now I’m not a prophet here.. but I’m guessing we all don’t need more anxiety right now Hell maybe we hit on something here! Maybe It’s been a stress reliever??! That’s why you guys are acting like the world is coming to an end? It all makes sense now!!
Why didn’t I think of this!!! I’m going to start complaining like it’s the last year to complain!

by all means. Let all let it out! Please everyone!! Complain away ! We need to invite Brandon back he could lead us in complaining. Brandon must be furious right now he could be Supreme Potentate of Complaints.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Either you see the basis for taking Love and understand the reasoning, or you don't. So you either think it's stupid, or you don't.

What was said in the first place (and what you repeat here) was that it's stupid if it doesn't work, but brilliant if it does.

That's what's stupid.

You don't understand that I consider trading up in the first round to select Love to be a stupid move no matter what.

I will be proven wrong and gladly have to eat a lot of crow if the Packers win another Super Bowl with Rodgers and Love turns out to be the next franchise quarterback but the chances for that to happen are pretty slim in my opinion.

Its absolutely imperative to allow your GM/HC flexibility (especially when you are making drastic changes to a system/staff). You don’t automatically jump ship on your GM because he’s got a plan that doesn’t perfectly align with one (or even a group) of your employees/fans.

I don’t agree with every move Gutekunst makes any more than you do Captain. But the level of criticism he’s taking this early in the process from so many fans only speaks one thing to me.

In my opinion Gutekunst has done a very good job over the first two seasons of his tenure as the general manager although I didn't agree with selecting Gary at #12 last year.

I don't understand the approach in this year's draft coming of a 13-3 season and making it to the NFCCG at all though.

IHell maybe we hit on something here! Maybe It’s been a stress reliever??! That’s why you guys are acting like the world is coming to an end? It all makes sense now!!

Nobody is acting like the world is coming to an end. We're all here to discuss about the Packers and criticism of the team's moves should be allowed, although there are some posters around here not understanding that concept.

 

[GleefulGary]

You don't understand that I consider trading up in the first round to select Love to be a stupid move no matter what.

I will be proven wrong and gladly have to eat a lot of crow if the Packers win another Super Bowl with Rodgers and Love turns out to be the next franchise quarterback but the chances for that to happen are pretty slim in my opinion.

Lol.

This is what @dantes is talking about.

Your two statements are contradictory to each other.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Ok, so what you're expressing here is a perspective that this move was stupid, for reasons you've offered, and we can assume that even if it works out that you will persist that it was stupid?

My guess is that a lot of people, maybe including you and maybe not, are going to call this move stupid if Love busts, or smart if Love hits and the Packers are able to go from one good QB to another without a gap. But they wouldn't offer that same sort of sliding scale standard if the selection had met their expectations.

If he's elite, then sure it was a smart move. But you are talking about a rare classification of QB that he statistically doesn't have a good chance of achieving.

If Love becomes a "good" QB, then that's still a positive. But the window in which a competitive roster on a rookie contract would be maintained sound him still be very small. With as much as QBs are making now , a "good" QB isn't necessarily a great investment on a second contract.

This move does two things, IMO. First, is put pressure on the FO to use other means of filling holes now that the first and fourth picks are gone. It's nearly a unanimous opinion that they did not do so. And secondly, it puts pressure on Love to become the caliber of QB in which very few are. If he becomes comparable to Dak Prescott, a good not great QB, this move will be viewed much differently and there will be much more criticism as to why the team didn't do more during Rodgers'final years. If he fails completely, it's a gaff of historic measure. The potential risk and downside outweigh the realistic reward, IMO

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Your two statements are contradictory to each other.

There's nothing contradictory about my statements. It's possible the move works out perfectly even with me considering it stupid. The chances for that to happen aren't high though.

 

[Dantés]

You don't understand that I consider trading up in the first round to select Love to be a stupid move no matter what.

I will be proven wrong and gladly have to eat a lot of crow if the Packers win another Super Bowl with Rodgers and Love turns out to be the next franchise quarterback but the chances for that to happen are pretty slim in my opinion.

I wouldn't have considered selecting a prospect at another position who could have the potential to help the team this season stupid even if that move hadn't worked out.

On the other side Gutekunst trading up to select a quarterback while having a future HOFer on the roster with four years left on his current deal who has repeatedly mentioned he wants to play into his 40s is stupid.

The move has the potential to be brilliant but should be considered an utter failure if it doesn't work out

You don't understand... your own position?

 

[Dantés]

If he's elite, then sure it was a smart move. But you are talking about a rare classification of QB that he statistically doesn't have a good chance of achieving.

If Love becomes a "good" QB, then that's still a positive. But the window in which a competitive roster on a rookie contract would be maintained sound him still be very small. With as much as QBs are making now , a "good" QB isn't necessarily a great investment on a second contract.

This move does two things, IMO. First, is put pressure on the FO to use other means of filling holes now that the first and fourth picks are gone. It's nearly a unanimous opinion that they did not do so. And secondly, it puts pressure on Love to become the caliber of QB in which very few are. If he becomes comparable to Dak Prescott, a good not great QB, this move will be viewed much differently and there will be much more criticism as to why the team didn't do more during Rodgers'final years. If he fails completely, it's a gaff of historic measure. The potential risk and downside outweigh the realistic reward, IMO

I consider there to be two intellectually honest ways to look at this move.

1) If the FO believes that Love is a future high end franchise QB, then the move to take him was smart. Despite the inconvenient timing, it's wise to snap those guys up when you have the chance. So even if he doesn't pan out (as you mentioned, prospects fail for lots of reasons), it was a smart move given their evaluation.

OR

2) The timing of this move and the great roster situation of the Packers makes this move stupid, and even if it works out in the long run and Love is a 3rd consecutive HOF QB, it will remain a stupid move for those reasons.

There's a third way, which is not at all intellectually honest:

3) I don't like the timing of this move or how it prevented the team from addressing another position, so I'm going to say it's stupid, but if it works then in a few years I will call it brilliant.

Process and results are not the same thing.

 

[GleefulGary]

There's nothing contradictory about my statements. It's possible the move works out perfectly even with me considering it stupid. The chances for that to happen aren't high though.

"I think it's a stupid move no matter what."

"If it works out well, I'll be proven wrong and it was a good move."

 

[GreenNGold_81]

I'll say this about Love... I'll be watching preseason this time around!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You don't understand... your own position?

No, you don't understand my position and it would be smart if you would focus on your own thoughts moving forward.

I consider there to be two intellectually honest ways to look at this move.

If the FO believes that Love is a future high end franchise QB, then the move to take him was smart. Despite the inconvenient timing, it's wise to snap those guys up when you have the chance. So even if he doesn't pan out (as you mentioned, prospects fail for lots of reasons), it was a smart move given their evaluation.

OR

2) The timing of this move and the great roster situation of the Packers makes this move stupid, and even if it works out in the long run and Love is a 3rd consecutive HOF QB, it will remain a stupid move for those reasons.

There's a third way, which is not at all intellectually honest:

3) I don't like the timing of this move or how it prevented the team from addressing another position, so I'm going to say it's stupid, but if it works then in a few years I will call it brilliant.

Process and results are not the same thing.

It's probable you meant intellectualy dishonest but trying to comprehend other people's thoughts resulted in you not being able to understand your own position anymore.

"I think it's a stupid move no matter what."

"If it works out well, I'll be proven wrong and it was a good move."

What's tough to understand about it??? I think drafting Love in the first round was stupid but I could be wrong about it.

 

[GleefulGary]

What's tough to understand about it??? I think drafting Love in the first round was stupid but I could be wrong about it.

Lololol.

Buddy oh boy.

If you say it was stupid no matter what, then when you say "if it works out it was a good move" you're contradicting yourself.

If your first statement is true, stupid no matter what, then the following statement must also be true, "if it works, it was still a stupid move."

 

[Dantés]

No, you don't understand my position and 1. it would be smart if you would focus on your own thoughts moving forward.



2. It's probable you meant intellectualy dishonest but trying to comprehend other people's thoughts resulted in you not being able to understand your own position anymore.

After attempting to figure out what you're trying to say in #2, I've decided to just take your advice on #1.

 

[Heyjoe4]

There-- you nailed it.

Either you see the basis for taking Love and understand the reasoning, or you don't. So you either think it's stupid, or you don't.

What was said in the first place (and what you repeat here) was that it's stupid if it doesn't work, but brilliant if it does.

That's what's stupid.

Hey Dantes, well put. I don’t see the logic in taking Love. It really is that simple. It’s a bet against Rodgers IMO. Geez ARod, thanks for everything.......

 

[Taryn Miller]

Being new to this site and obviously late to this discussion, and one who was knocked backwards a bit with the Love selection and more so because it was a trade-up move, my first thought was they'd (FO) have essentially given up on winning another SB with Rodgers, regardless of how one feels about the 13-3 record of last season.

I believe the vast majority of fans were expecting more of an all-in draft to ensure, as much as possible, being one of two teams of the field in the next SB. The players that were passed on and lost via the trade-up for Love and looking at the over value they placed upon the remaining selections is spots that are still valuable to a teams draft, one cannot help but sense the towel was tossed into the ring.

I know there are those who will use the 'securing the future' argument and I understand that point, but I cannot help but ask if Love is such a talent that will emerge in 2 years, why did the Raiders and Jac not select him with their second 1st round picks or why wouldn't Pitts make a trade-up to secure their after Big Ben's couple of years left, and if IND was going to draft Love ahead of GB, then only having Rivers for one year certainly should have had them be much more inclined to get him than GB, where Rodgers is for the next 4 years.

'You don't let a guy like Love go by, if you have the chance to get him.'

This was the immediate defense from the FO and fans who immediately defend whatever they say. Still, teams that were in more need of the next QB in two years all passed him up.

Thanks for reading while being a late entry.

 

[Mondio]

Being new to this site and obviously late to this discussion, and one who was knocked backwards a bit with the Love selection and more so because it was a trade-up move, my first thought was they'd (FO) have essentially given up on winning another SB with Rodgers, regardless of how one feels about the 13-3 record of last season.

I believe the vast majority of fans were expecting more of an all-in draft to ensure, as much as possible, being one of two teams of the field in the next SB. The players that were passed on and lost via the trade-up for Love and looking at the over value they placed upon the remaining selections is spots that are still valuable to a teams draft, one cannot help but sense the towel was tossed into the ring.

I know there are those who will use the 'securing the future' argument and I understand that point, but I cannot help but ask if Love is such a talent that will emerge in 2 years, why did the Raiders and Jac not select him with their second 1st round picks or why wouldn't Pitts make a trade-up to secure their after Big Ben's couple of years left, and if IND was going to draft Love ahead of GB, then only having Rivers for one year certainly should have had them be much more inclined to get him than GB, where Rodgers is for the next 4 years.

'You don't let a guy like Love go by, if you have the chance to get him.'

This was the immediate defense from the FO and fans who immediately defend whatever they say. Still, teams that were in more need of the next QB in two years all passed him up.

Thanks for reading while being a late entry.

Why did 20+ teams pass on Rodgers, why did Brady last almost 200 picks into the draft? It's not an exact science. I don't really pre rank any draft picks, probably why i'm never as upset with picks as some others. I'm not married to any and can see all sorts of posibilities heading into the draft. I like to take time and get to know them after I know who we've picked.

anyway, outside of Burrows, i'm not sure I would have picked any QB before Love in that draft, and I'm talking any team. Physically this kid has everything you need to be a really good QB. I would have taken him over Tua likely and definitely over Herbert.

 

[Taryn Miller]

Why did 20+ teams pass on Rodgers, why did Brady last almost 200 picks into the draft? It's not an exact science. I don't really pre rank any draft picks, probably why i'm never as upset with picks as some others. I'm not married to any and can see all sorts of posibilities heading into the draft. I like to take time and get to know them after I know who we've picked.

anyway, outside of Burrows, i'm not sure I would have picked any QB before Love in that draft, and I'm talking any team. Physically this kid has everything you need to be a really good QB. I would have taken him over Tua likely and definitely over Herbert.

As much as you and surely others will disagree, the question that is asked when a player drops in the draft, character concerns. Now let's not jump into it needing to be an off-field character issue, but rather a persona character issue. Hindsight is always 20-20, but we cannot deny that Rodgers persona/character has been a topic for much of his career. There's a reason for his fall in 05' and it likely won't come out until after he retires and those teams speak to it, truthfully, but that's always suspect also.

Brady is the extreme outlier and him falling into the hands of Bellichek and NE and the ensuing success will never be seen again. Would the odds be equal or greater that Brady going in the first round to any top 5 team his career would be close to what it is...absolutely not. If fact, the odds are greater that he would have retired years ago.

However, how QB's today are seen is much different than with Rodgers and Brady's time of drafting.
Apples and oranges comparisons are always used to support weak argument.

Lastly, perhaps the 22 teams after SF didn't need a QB or didn't see the need to draft one to sit for three years which I did not do. Maybe they wanted or needed more for the then mindset.

 

[Mondio]

apples and oranges huh?

considering there are only a handful or so QB's in the history of the NFL that really stack up to Brady and Rodgers, one might be able to consider every other QB an orange at this point. LOL

dismissing anything you don't like so easily is also the sign of a weak argument.

facts are almost 30 teams passed on Rodgers. But since things are so different then, why did 31 other selections happen before Lamar Jackson? the consensus 2019 NFL MVP of the league?

I look at all those teams, so many still need a quarterback, especially now. Maybe they would have been smart to take him instead of who they did?
I myself don't think so, i think he's overrated, but that's me.

You answered the question with your last sentence practically. Teams have all sorts of reasons for not picking someone and they don't always turn out the "right" way. Same reasons why 23 other players were taken before Rodgers. and the story is yet to be written about Love.

 

[Taryn Miller]

apples and oranges huh?

considering there are only a handful or so QB's in the history of the NFL that really stack up to Brady and Rodgers, one might be able to consider every other QB an orange at this point. LOL

dismissing anything you don't like so easily is also the sign of a weak argument.

facts are almost 30 teams passed on Rodgers. But since things are so different then, why did 31 other selections happen before Lamar Jackson? the consensus 2019 NFL MVP of the league?

I look at all those teams, so many still need a quarterback, especially now. Maybe they would have been smart to take him instead of who they did?
I myself don't think so, i think he's overrated, but that's me.

You answered the question with your last sentence practically. Teams have all sorts of reasons for not picking someone and they don't always turn out the "right" way. Same reasons why 23 other players were taken before Rodgers. and the story is yet to be written about Love.

I'm not dismissing anything, but simply applying a counter thought.

 

[Mondio]

I'm not dismissing anything, but simply applying a counter thought.

LOL

you called them apples and oranges and called it weak, what was it supposed to mean if not dismissive?

Then you proceeded to tell us how teams may have had reasons to pass on Rodgers ranging from they didn't like him to, they didn't need him. Which was my point. Teams like some players, not others and in hindsight they get all sorts of decisions right or wrong. You said it's different today, I present Lamar Jackson, 32nd pick in the 2018 NFL draft and 2019 NFL MVP. I can think of at least 10 teams that still need a QB that should have picked him. Win some, lose some.

The story on Love isn't written yet, they can't even have OTA's.