1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Westbrook Vs. McCluster

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Cardsmc25, Apr 13, 2010.

?

Westbrook or McCluster...

  1. Westbrook

    4 vote(s)
    16.7%
  2. McCluster

    19 vote(s)
    79.2%
  3. Other (explain in your post)

    1 vote(s)
    4.2%
  1. Cardsmc25

    Cardsmc25 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    212
    Ratings:
    +7
    I want to have a weigh in among the forum. It will be a one or the other scenario. If we get Westbrook, I don't see the Packers drafting McCluster. My vote is on McCluster. I see him being the next Percy Harvin (immediate impact). Lets see what everyone else thinks...
     
  2. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    It's not exclusive. Westbrook is veteran. He's not going to be our future 3rd down back, if he's signed.

    And TT never used the draft solely to shore up pressing needs.

    If McCluster is selected, is not because we don't have anyone in there NOW.

    It's because he's the BPA, and because we don't have any future plans for that position. And still could be because of his return ability.

    Getting Westbrook doesn't exclude getting McCluster. If McCluster isn't selected in the draft, Westbrook will have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with it.
     
  3. DILLIGAFF

    DILLIGAFF Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    603
    Ratings:
    +4
    I agree if McCluster is there he should be considered in the second round, but he may not be the best player available, we may go with an OT.

    Now if we have an additional 2rd pick (Colledge gets his wish/trading down) then maybe. If McCluster is there for us in the 3rd yes.

    I can see TT signing Westbrook as insurance before the draft, but if things work out still picking McCluster. I don't think signing Westbrook in an uncapped year will have any effect on TT's decision in the draft.

    Signing Westbrook may affect his 5th round and below choices, but not in the upper rounds where McCluster will more than likely go.
     
  4. Cardsmc25

    Cardsmc25 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    212
    Ratings:
    +7
    I disagree completely with you saying that Westbrook would have nothing to do with it... Do you really think that TT will take a second rounder that gives a younger version of Westbrook? I really don't think he would. I don't see him using a pick on a back until late in the draft if he were to sign Westbrook (hence no more McCluster). So I do feel that Westbrook would greatly affect TT choosing to draft another position.

    That said, TT has been know to take the BPA more often then not, I just don't agree with saying that it will have nothing to do with Westbrook.
     
  5. DILLIGAFF

    DILLIGAFF Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    603
    Ratings:
    +4
    I am lost, what is BPA?
     
  6. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,125
    Ratings:
    +4,082
    Best Pick Available I believe but I could be wrong
     
  7. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    This.

    Aaron Rodgers (Favre). Jordy Nelson (Jennings and Driver). Briam Brohm (Rodgers). I rest my case.
     
  8. Cardsmc25

    Cardsmc25 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    212
    Ratings:
    +7
    So you are arguing... if McCluster is there and we already have Westbrook... TT will still take him... otherwise it had nothing to do with Westbrook?
     
  9. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    I'm not arguing that TT WILL or WILL NOT pick him.

    But that due to Westbrook being in his last legs, he's not going to dictate who TT selects.

    If we had picked Sproles, or even a less-used guy in Taylor, then it would be different.

    The way I think TT looks at the 3rd back position is this:
    He may think that we're set with Brandon Jackson. If so, then he's not going to pick McCluster. This is the most important thing in dictating wheter we pick him or not.

    Now, considering he doesn't.

    If we don't have Westbrook, then we have a hole in there. If he believes McCluster is the guy to solve it, he picks him. He won't pick him because he feels pressed by this hole, though. The hole only permits him to pick.

    But even if we do have Westbrook, he'd be only good for one, two years. TT allways drafts thinking about future needs. So the future hole is still there. He'd still pick McCluster if he though he would be the future 3rd down back of the Packers.

    And remember, McCluster would still be our KR. He could still be picked for that reason, which Westbrook doesn't do...

    Made myself more clear now? Can't explain how I think TT acts better...
     
  10. Jess

    Jess Movement!

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,118
    Ratings:
    +471
    If it must be one or the other, and I'm not sure it has to be, I'll take McCluster simply based on age and the fact that he has no concussion issues.

    I don't see why both of them can't be here. Sign Westbrook, draft McCluster, cut Brandon Jackson if Westbrook looks healthy during the preseason.
     
  11. Sunshine885500

    Sunshine885500 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    209
    Ratings:
    +49
    The bigger picture is that if the Pack signs Westbrook and if which is a Big IF he can stay healthy then they can attack their most pressing needs early on in the draft.

    1.) Another Pass Rusher - OLB
    2.) Replacement LT
    3.) CB

    There is no question that McCluster would help, but would it be that much more then Westbrook if he's healthy? If the Pack is going to make a SB run this year then this would be the perfect scenario because they can get a RB next year if need be!
     
  12. lancer84

    lancer84 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    276
    Ratings:
    +9
    Agreed. McCluster is faster anyway, plus Westbrook (without injury) only has probably a good 2 years left.
     
  13. DILLIGAFF

    DILLIGAFF Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    603
    Ratings:
    +4
    In all reality the only concern I have on Offense is the O-line, even if we start the year with Grant,Jackson,Lumpkin, or Wynn. Still wish we kept Sutton.

    Westbrook would be a nice addition for TT's price (cheap), but is not nececcary.

    On the other hand I have serious questions marks about our return men on special teams. McCluster would be a nice up grade here and he cold be that change up back on offense.

    So IMO TT is thinking a back like McCluster in the draft, and if the numbers make sense, then you get a guy like Westbrook.
     
  14. Mack_20

    Mack_20 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    366
    Ratings:
    +7
    I as well would have liked to keep Sutton, but thats done with now. Westbrook can still have the capability to be a stud in this league if he can stay healthy, but he never can. Also, its already been mentioned I think, but one more knock to the head and the guy's football career is over. If we sign him, I hope we can still sign McCluster or a different RB in the draft to help us out, and if Westbrook is healthy, we might just have to part ways with Jackson.
     
  15. DILLIGAFF

    DILLIGAFF Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    603
    Ratings:
    +4
    I am not sold on Jackson, IMO I liked Sutton better. There is no way we can part ways with Jackson because of a healthy Westbrook. Westbrook has a bad left knee and like you said is done with one more big blow to the head.

    I would agree with you had we signed Chestor Taylor, which was what I wanted and could see parting ways with Jackson at that point.

    IMO Westbrook will want a pretty good sum of money to play and make it worth his while, otherwise I see him retiring. I don't see this signing happening because of the money.

    I like Westbrook and would rather him retire than suffer another concussion causing him medical complications the rest of his life.
     
  16. packers020802

    packers020802 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    450
    Ratings:
    +55
    My vote is on McCluster. I see him being the next Percy Harvin (immediate impact)
    Cardsmc25 says it best....
    McCluster would be a GREAT fit w. the Pack.
    Though the thought of having B. Westbrook in the slot and Grant in also on shotgun plays is awesome....the fact is THAT WESTBROOK IS FRAGILE
    He'll be on the IR by week four....
    PASS on B. Westbrook please.
    Draft that Gaurd from Idaho in the 1st and McCluster if avail. in the 2nd!
    CB and LB next...
     
  17. DILLIGAFF

    DILLIGAFF Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2009
    Messages:
    603
    Ratings:
    +4
    I am high an Iupatai also, IMO we have as big a need at LG as LT. Spitz has back problems and Colledge is not panning out worthy of a extended contract.

    Iupatai will have an impact the first year and be a main anchor for that line opposit of Sitton for years to come.

    If we get Iupatai in the first round I can see GB trading Colledge for what they can get, even 5th or 4th round pick in this years draft.
     
  18. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    We do, I'd say even more. At LT we still have Clifton and Lang. At LG, noone.

    BUT a couple of things:

    You can find guards much later in the draft. LT is usually a strickly 1st rounder thing.

    And Iupati is the complete opposite of all our OL. He's too big to play the zone, and too raw to play the zone. He'd be a better fit in Pittsburgh, or Philadelphia...

    But I do think he's the best LG in years...
     
  19. turbo69

    turbo69 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Messages:
    702
    Ratings:
    +41
    Iupati 322lbs

    Spitz 307lbs
    Colledge 308lbs

    Clifton 322lbs
    Tauscher 316lbs
    Lang 316lbs

    Everyone here knows what I think about Iupati. I love this guy. As far as weight is concerned........he is only 10 to 15lbs more than the Guards we have, and 20 lbs more than Wells. He might be a little raw, but I would think it would be a mistake to not take him at 23. Especially if Charles Brown isn't there. I know it wouldn't be the sexiest picks in the world, but wouldn't be pissed (with Brown off the board at 23) to pick Iupati in the first, Koa Misi in the second, and Jared Veldheer in the third, Paris Cox or Walter McFadden in the 4th, Larry Asante or Myron Rolle in the 5th.
    Mesko in the 6th.........and the best on the board with the 2 extra picks ( T. Holliday maybe)

    I just feel that picking one Lineman isn't going to be enough to NOT have to do it again .....next year. Lets get the line taken care of so we can focus on other issues in next years draft. Once in awhile you can fine lineman in later rounds......lets just get it done this year. I am sure A. Rodgers would appreciate it. Otherwise he might end up running around......like a chick in a Bar........with Ben Rothlisberger in it.
     
  20. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    NONONO, don't get me wrong. I think Iupati would be a great pick, if, like you said, there isn't any LT worthy left.

    10 pounds is a lot. If Charles Brown had played under 310 pounds instead of 290, his stock would be up there with Okung.

    But nobody said he can't drop it. All of his problems are due to Idaho being a small school. He's very much coachable, and his upside is tremenduous. When he played in his level of competition, he completely dominated. With one year to lose weight, gain agility and learn how to better block, he could be a force in the middle like Snee.

    My point is, right now, he probably could start in Phi or Pitt's scheme, but he probably couldn't in ours, that's why I said he's a sexier pick to them. My intention wasn't to say he just doesn't fit our scheme...
     
  21. turbo69

    turbo69 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Messages:
    702
    Ratings:
    +41
    LOL thats cool.........so what do you think about my picks in that last post if Brown isn't there at 23?
     
  22. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    Not that big fan of Misi... But the rest is ery good...
     

Share This Page