Thompson Bolsters Depth and Special Teams With 2015 Draft

Packers general manager Ted Thompson clearly likes his football team but recognizes his special teams units needed major help.

It can be hard being a fan of the Green Bay Packers in the offseason. Free agency is almost always a wash. We tend to look forward to the draft with even more intensity than other fanbases because it's almost always the only way our general manager brings in new blood. You wait and you wait, the weekend arrives - and they pick a bunch of players who probably won't see the field much early on. It's not exciting, but it's good team-building and Thompson has proven to be one of the best in the league in that regard. 

Thompson found a group of players this year that may not contribute a whole lot right away from scrimmage, but the whole class outside of the quarterback will probably be able to contribute right away on special teams. The class certainly seems to reflect Thompson's affection for his team. But it also reflects that he recognized a severe deficiency on his special teams units. 

Listed below is a wrap up of all our coverage here at Cheesehead TV of the Packers' 2015 draft class. 

Damarious Randall 

Quinten Rollins

Ty Montgomery

Jake Ryan

Brett Hundley

Aaron Ripkowski

Christian Ringo

Kennard Backman

 

PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.

__________________________

0 points
 

Comments (93)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Idiot Fan's picture

May 02, 2015 at 05:56 pm

I loved the first four picks. I didn't love, but I understand, the qb pick. I'm kind of baffled by the fb pick. All in all though, I'm happy with it.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 02, 2015 at 06:23 pm

Have to think they see Ripkowski as the eventual replacement for Kuhn, who they brought back again on a one year deal. Eventually, it will be time to move on. There's a good chance it's next year.

And also, again, he is most likely an immediate contributor on special teams.

0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

May 02, 2015 at 06:29 pm

Aaron do you know Rollins and Montgomerys numbers? Can't find em anywhere.

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

May 02, 2015 at 06:43 pm

Montgomery is 88. I think Rollins will be 23.

0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

May 02, 2015 at 07:10 pm

Randall is 23 Evan.

0 points
0
0
Idiot Fan's picture

May 02, 2015 at 07:10 pm

So does that mean two FBs on the 53 this year? Or do they try to get him on the PS?

0 points
0
0
Jordan's picture

May 05, 2015 at 02:41 am

Could be any scenario. Nobody knows.

Kuhn gets cut.
Ripkowski gets cut.
They keep both on 53.
They keep Kuhn and Ripkowski goes to PS.

The only thing we know are the facts. The facts say Kuhn was first team All Pro. Kuhn announced he was going to test free agency in January. Kuhn did test free agency. Kuhn signed a 1 year deal with Packers for (more or less) league minimum for a veteran. Kuhn is unique situation whereas not too many 1st team ALL PRO players strikeout in free agency and have to settle for a non-guaranteed league minimum 1 year deal. Fullbacks aren't used by that many NFL teams and he's old.

Kuhn is 32. Ted Thompson has a history of choosing a young player over an old player.

My opinion is if Ripkowski can learn the offense and can play, Kuhn will be cut this year. If not, they'll throw Ripkowski on the practice squad this year and he'll replace Kuhn in 2016. It would be very unlikely that Ripkowski would be stolen off of the practive squad when he knows he's going to be replacing Kuhn after this season. The Packers could always pay him more to stay on the PS if they had to.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 06, 2015 at 08:23 pm

Don't just look at the position. Think about ST. We've kept more than 1 FB on the final roster before. Kuhn, Johnson and Hall - right??

0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

May 02, 2015 at 06:00 pm

Ok I'm seriously gonna lose it if I don't find out what jersey nnumber Rollins is gonna wear!? I was thinkin 36? Buy Collins jersey off ebay for cheap change C to an R?

0 points
0
0
TNockerts's picture

May 03, 2015 at 09:30 am

Nothing official but I guess he will wear 22 since it is his college number. No one has that number yet.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 03, 2015 at 10:43 am

LMAO!!! That was a classic, change the C to a R. That made me laugh, creative EdsLaces!!

0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

May 03, 2015 at 12:24 pm

Thanks haha.....damn I miss Nick Collins..Hope we just got someone close to his skills in this draft.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

May 02, 2015 at 06:14 pm

This draft definitely showed a priority on pass defense and special teams. I guess if you have 2 MLB's on the field for less than 20% of the snaps why spend a high pick one if you don't think they are going to be an All-Pro.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 02, 2015 at 06:28 pm

Very good observation Jeremy. That's why I wasn't as hung up on ILB as most people. They're in sub so much and move Matthews around so much, it isn't exactly a premium position. Yes, it'd be great to have a dynamic talent there, but there really weren't any in this draft. There were a bunch of good backers, no doubt. But there really isn't much separating them from each other.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 02, 2015 at 09:35 pm

Is it really only 20%? Not including STs, Hawk played 837 snaps. Jones played 209, Lattimore 281 and Barrington played 355 defensive snaps. I don't know how many snaps CM3 played inside.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

May 03, 2015 at 12:09 am

It might be more. But its less than 50% so the point remians the same.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 04, 2015 at 06:34 am

Jeremy, you are one of the posters I always pay attention to since I have found many of your posts here and on APC (IIRC) to be astute. Above you stated an opinion and cited a fact in support thereof. When the validity or accuracy of the fact was questioned, you wrote that whether the facts was true or reasonably accurate didn't matter. Interesting.

It is a tough fact to substantiate. Here's my best shot: Per Football Outsiders, GB played 1093 defensive snaps (i.e. not including STs or offense snaps). There are two ILB positions, so there are 2186 potential snaps at ILB. Hawk played 837 snaps (76.6%); Barrington played 355 snaps (32.5%); Lattimore played 281 (25.7%); and Brad Jones played 209 snaps (19.1%). Those total 1682 snaps. I can't tell how many CM3 played at ILB as opposed to OLB. I shouldn't think that Hawk, Barrington, Jones, or Lattimore played very many snaps at a position other than ILB. 1682 divided by 2186 = 76.9%. If CM3 played 10 snaps a game at ILB after the bye week, then there were two ILBs on the field 81% of the time. If you see a flaw in my methodology, feel free to point it out. As a side note, while doing this, I ran a control on NT. Pennel and Guion played 32% of the defensive snaps (they may have both been on the field together sometimes). NT thus better fits you theory of what position should be devalued.

0 points
0
0
Idiot Fan's picture

May 04, 2015 at 10:30 am

First, I love the analysis. Second, I don't think it's quite right. I'm not sure that you can add up the snaps that way and conclude that they had two ILBs on the field that percentage of the time because you don't know which of those snaps were played at the same time versus separately. I tried to create a simple example to show what I mean, and here's the best I could come up with:

I did a simulation of 100 plays for two ILB positions, where I used a random number generator to choose either a 0 or a 1 for each of two ILB positions (though I fixed it so that there was at least one ILB on each play). I then added up the total number of 1s for the ILB positions (i.e., plays where that position was on the field), and I got 52 (ILB1) + 82 (ILB2) = 132 out of 200, or 66%. However, if you look at each of the 100 plays, and count how many plays actually have the two ILBs playing at the same time, it's only 32 out of 100, or 32%.

0 points
0
0
Brandon Piccione's picture

May 04, 2015 at 08:03 am

I would think they have two linebackers on the field well over half the time. They primarily run nickel, but its a 2-4 scheme ussually, and their "base" defense also employs two inside backers.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

May 04, 2015 at 08:49 am

That's pretty much how I see it, Brandon. They are in base 3-4 infrequently but use 4 LB formations a whole lot.

I don't think it alters Jeremy's basic point much, tho. Prior to their decline last season, Hawk and Jones were serviceable, at least. They just have to get back to that level if they can't find a "difference maker". And you definitely want "difference makers" in the first two rounds.

Capers used some of the surplus of OLB to cover some ILB snaps last year. No reason he can't do that again.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 04, 2015 at 11:43 am

Dear Idiot Fan (I love the screen name, BTW), Brandon, Hank,

I really was asking for feedback on my methodology. To be honest, when I concluded that there were two ILBers on the field at the same time somewhere between 77 and 81% of the time, I was, well, surprised. I thought someone might well point out some fatal flaw and completely discredit my analysis. Someone might yet do so. [I wish when you add a comment, it didn't stop you from looking back at previous comments because I wanted to address Jeremy's main point and I wanted to read his comment again so I didn't misquote or take him out of context.]

I don't really disagree that ILB play has been devalued, and it may be that the play provided by Hawk, Jones and Lattimore was soo bad in TT's opinion that he thinks it can be duplicated or surpassed by current personnel or rookies, or that he thinks Bradford or someone else on the roster will blossom, and Barrington will increase his snaps a lot. I certainly can't say what TT thinks.

0 points
0
0
Jordan's picture

May 06, 2015 at 09:26 am

I think the general idea is that the Packers *should* have a lead in most games since they have the NFL's best quarterback.

In theory, opposing teams will have to pass the ball a lot since they are playing from behind on the scoreboard...which is going to frequently put the Packers defense in nickel and dime.

I'm pretty sure that is why the Packers are placing a greater emphasis on nickle/dime players than ILB in the draft.

Even though M. Lynch rushed for 157 yards in the NFC Championship, we all know he wasn't a big contributing reason why the Packers lost the game.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

May 07, 2015 at 08:38 am

The quantitative analysis is all well and good but it leads me to consider the logical next question, which is: But when and in what situation as well as how many of those plays were run at or involved those 1 or 2 ILBs? So either way at some percentage Hawk and Jones were in on the play and the results were there for all to see. Slow to react, painfully chasing the action, and boneheaded plays galore. Quality. So this year we will be better if only by their absence. As long as we get solid play this year from the existing group, and I no doubt that we will, I believe we will be so much better. Lot of talent ,
Just have to let them play to find out.

0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

May 02, 2015 at 06:28 pm

Really interested in how the front 7 plays, because TT showed considerable confidence in this unit in terms of the draft.

Drafting a project DT/DE? in the 6th and a Hawk 2.0 (on a good day) in the 4th tells me that the team has a lot of faith that guys like Jayron Elliott, Josh Boyd, Datone Jones, Sam Barrington, and possibly Carl Bradford will be big contributors in 2015. Hope they are correct.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 02, 2015 at 06:30 pm

Like I told Corey, getting Hawk 2.0 in the 4th round is fine by me. Hawk had a very good, steady career in Green Bay. He was always viewed as a disappointment because of where he was drafted. If he had been drafted in the 4th round, people would be signing songs about him.

Ok, maybe not, but you get what I'm saying...

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

May 02, 2015 at 07:00 pm

As long as the defense from the second half of 2014 shows up again, they'll be fine. Especially the defensive coordinator, who did some really creative things to maximize what he had. From that group, there are no significant losses in the front 7. They'll add Raji and Jake Ryan to that mix.

If some of their younger players make a significant jump, it will certainly be helpful. But things can be fine if they don't play much better than they did in 2014.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

May 02, 2015 at 06:44 pm

This rookie group may not contribute much beyond STs. But there certainly is realistic openings for them to do so. As always, it depends on how they adjust to life in the NFL.

I can see one of the DBs logging big snaps. The questions about Hayward's ability to play outside leave some room for one to grab a starting spot.

The Packers de-emphasized 4 WR looks but Montgomery might change that.

Barrington doesn't set a real high bar for Ryan to clear. Besides, Capers really got creative with using all the LBs on the roster last season.

Ripkowski can be valuable in short yardage and 4 minute offense.

I expect the existing TEs to perform better in 2015 but the 2014 performance from that group leaves room for Backman to add something.

D-Line rotations mean anyone that makes the team will likely get some snaps.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 04, 2015 at 07:00 am

GB is losing 1417 snaps that House (405) and Tramon (1012) played on defense. Perhaps Hayward (426 snaps last year) can increase his snaps by 600, and Hyde (704) can increase his by 300, which assumes that neither gets hurt and both play over 90% of the available snaps. Assuming that rosy scenario, Randall, Rollings, Goodson, or a UDFA is going to have to suck up probably at least 500 snaps. I suppose GB could adjust their schemes to play 3 CBs less often, or use a safety more.

I agree with your point about the CBs, I just thought "I can see one of the DBs logging big snaps" as an understatement. One should reasonably expect to get 500+ snaps out of a 1st round rookie CB and a 2nd round rookie CB combined though. If Randall or Rollins beats out Hayward, the problem is largely solved.

0 points
0
0
barutanseijin's picture

May 02, 2015 at 07:03 pm

I'm OK with Ryan as the ILB pickup. The guys TT passed on didn't seem all that wonderful to me.

The one thing i don't like about this year's crop of draftees is that there isn't any OL fodder in it. Barclay will be back, but will he even be up to his pre-injury level?

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 02, 2015 at 08:07 pm

Very good point. First time Ted hasn't taken a single o-lineman I believe.

They did sign at least one as a UFA. We'll have the complete list up tomorrow morning.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

May 02, 2015 at 08:18 pm

Yes, it is the first time TT did not draft a single OL. In fact, last year was the first time he took only one OL. That question came up in the end of draft press availability with TT.

0 points
0
0
Allan Murphy's picture

May 03, 2015 at 06:52 pm

Now we get 12 more players after the draft right Aaron ?

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

May 02, 2015 at 07:09 pm

I said it yesterday and I'll say it again: I fail to see how drafting 2 CBs in the first 2 rounds who's best part of their game EXACTLY mirrors Heyward's and Hyde's games helps the team. While Shields did decently against Megatron and Dez, House was the only guy last year who could handle Julio. I fear H/W/S boundary WRs now.

Also, while our STs desperately needed an upgrade, and I'm glad that seems to have finally occurred, TT and MM must be really confident in their front 7 prospects developing, because outside of CM3 and Daniels, there is NO ONE right now who can be counted on to have an impact over the course of a full game.

OK Nagler. Mock away. You went at me last night on the live blog, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. ;)

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

May 02, 2015 at 07:37 pm

Not sure what you mean because they did not handle Julio at all.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 02, 2015 at 08:09 pm

The team didn't, but he's right about House. He played very well against Jones in that game. In fact the Jaguars sighted that performance specifically when they talked about why they signed him.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 05, 2015 at 07:03 am

House did, he was the only one that slowed him down.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 02, 2015 at 09:56 pm

For some reason I can't give anyone a thumbs up (or down). I agree with much of what you wrote, Bearmeat. Not concerned about the height issue on the CBs and I am fine with taking two CBs day one and two. I like Randall, Rollins, Ryan, Hundley, and to a lesser extent, Montgomery. I thought GB was very good even w/o any drafted players. I thought TT would be in a position to make a knock out blow in this draft by picking BPA. I just don't think he did. He must absolutely love Rollins. Anyway, a draft of Malcom Brown (or Goldman for that matter), Carl Davis or Walford or couple of others, and Dawson (I was not in the room when Dawson was interviewed so TT's passing on him is understandable) or Xavier Cooper for example looked possible, and there are other combinations of prospects possible as well. I don't buy the couldn't trade back argument, but there is no way to know what TT demanded. IIRC, the team at #33 traded back to 40 and got a 4th and a 7th. I rather thought that TT wouldn't take an ILB until the 3rd or 4th round because I figured they would all be gone by before we picked in the 2nd, I dislike trading up unless the GM really loves the target due to the expense of trading up in the first couple of rounds. I do expect some of these guys to become starters in the NFL, but time will tell.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 05, 2015 at 07:01 am

Like you I like the picks of Randell, Rollins, Ryan, and Hundley. I still would have preferred TT took Brown over Randell, but Randell has grown on me the more I've looked at him. However I love the Montgomery pick, I think he could really be a great piece in McCarthy's offense. This guy is a bigger, stronger version of Cobb. Last season was his first returning punts and he averaged 19.8 yards on 12 returns with 2 TD's. He averaged 27.8 (Something like that) for his career on kickoffs. Line him up in the backfield and get the ball to him in space like the Packers do with Cobb or New England did with Vereen, Eldelman, or Amendola in the SB and he'll give the Seahawks or any other team fits IMHO. I'm just really excited about what this kid could do in our offense. Time will tell but I have a feeling this kid could be one of the Packers most important pieces on offense very soon.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 05, 2015 at 08:39 am

'Line him up in the backfield and get the ball to him in space like the Packers do with Cobb or New England did with Vereen, Eldelman, or Amendola in the SB and he'll give the Seahawks or any other team fits IMHO.'

This is exactly my feelings as well. I think they drafted Montgomery for that very reason. To give them another player in space that can give them something extra against the Seattle's and other great defenses. My opinion they saw how New England attacked Seattle and how it worked and decided they needed another player in that role.
We don't need Montgomery to come in and have 40+ catches. We have Nelson, Cobb, Adams that will receive the majority of catches. We also have Lacy, and Rodgers that will be productive catching a quite a few passes as well.
What we need from Montgomery is to be our return specialist, and in offense if he can come in and make 1-3 catches a game from different spots on field to give defenses a different look and something else to think about it will really help.
Lacy has been a good receiver out of the backfield, but if they use Montgomery back there, he will provide a very different look and a different speed that can put more stress on defenses.

I really like how Montgomery can fit in our offense.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 05, 2015 at 08:25 pm

Absolutely RC. we're thinking the same thing about Montgomery and I can't wait! This kid is strong and fast (4.35 at Pro Day) and that's at 210 lbs so he's not one of those 5'7" 165 lbs guys that get the snot knocked out them the first hit they take. I think he could run between the tackles some plays (Like Cobb) but for bigger gains because he's bigger than Cobb, plus I don't have to hold my breath Cobby's going to get hurt. It's going to be fun!

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 06, 2015 at 10:08 am

I agree Nick, RC. It could be something simple like a screen with say Jordy out in front blocking. Montgomery has tremendous acceleration, vision, and patience in setting up his blockers (the things that make him such a good KR). He should be fun to watch.

0 points
0
0
Ibleedgreenmore's picture

May 09, 2015 at 05:01 pm

I have not been able to give any thumbs up or down for over a week.

0 points
0
0
tm_inter's picture

May 03, 2015 at 01:02 am

I disagree with Bearmeat's perception of our 2 new CBs as merely mirroring Hayward's and Hyde's games.

I think they are such good coverage CBs that Hayward and even Shields have to fear for their jobs. After all Shields' production last year dipped way below his best year's performance - he was way overpaid last year. And Hayward after 3 years with the Packers has yet to show his ability in outside coverage.

Although the Packers always give the veterans the first opportunity to start, I think either Randall or Rollins or both will eventually become starting cornerbacks.

0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

May 02, 2015 at 07:15 pm

I woulda liked a crazy stud freak athlete ilb, but maybe Ryan will be pretty good who knows...although u aren't supposed to trust a guy with 2 first names haha. I will say this though our Secondary is gonna be scary good this year. Q will be a stud!

0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

May 02, 2015 at 07:59 pm

We definitely needed to improve our special teams and it looks like TT went out of his way to improve that and improve our pass defense.

However, the last few years the Packers have been terrible at stopping the run and I don't see any picks in this year's draft that will help in that regard. Maybe having Raji back and Pennel being in his second year will do the trick. I sure hope so.

Also, I have to say that I'm unhappy they didn't draft a first-rate ILB. Maybe the talent wasn't there in TT's eyes, but I sure hate exposing Clay Matthews to a major injury while playing ILB. That scares me.

0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

May 02, 2015 at 10:34 pm

This is a team which nearly made the Superbowl despite a horrible special teams, a mediocre defense, and a hobbled Rodgers.

Special teams: fixed
Defense: should be better (although the absence of Truman might sting).
Offense: Rodgers back to old self. Receiving corps improved.

The only thing that can stop them is injury.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

May 03, 2015 at 12:14 am

I'll believe Special Teams is fixed when I see them play well for at least 5 games in a row. Until then Special Teams is suspect at best.

0 points
0
0
TKWorldWide's picture

May 03, 2015 at 01:27 pm

Were there any first rate ILB's out there?

0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

May 03, 2015 at 10:55 pm

Well, Sean Payton and the New Orleans Saints obviously felt the Stephone Anthony was a first-rate ILB.

0 points
0
0
calabasa's picture

May 04, 2015 at 10:07 am

The Saints lead the league with the highest number of players drafted by other teams on their roster. I wouldn't point to them as good talent evaluators.

0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

May 04, 2015 at 12:01 pm

And TT is infallible. He doesn't make any mistakes.

0 points
0
0
TKWorldWide's picture

May 05, 2015 at 09:05 pm

Could be. Time will tell.

0 points
0
0
HankScorpio's picture

May 04, 2015 at 09:00 am

How is the risk of injury to Clay Matthews any different based on his position at the snap of the ball? Why would playing him at ILB be any more of an injury concern than playing him outside?

OTOH, his production skyrocketed when they started moving him around inside and outside. From both spots.

0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

May 04, 2015 at 12:28 pm

ILB is a very physically demanding position. He is in the middle of the action and becomes a target for the guards, center, and tackles. The OLB is on the edge and usually has to deal with only the tackles or an occasional TE or RB.

Last year Matthews proved he can play ILB effectively. For the record I thought playing him there during the last half of the season was a brilliant move by McCarthy and Capers.

However, he is our best pass rusher and if he gets hurt our chances of winning another Lombardi Trophy diminish dramatically. I understand that injuries are a part of the game and can happen anytime and anywhere. But I believe it's prudent to limit his exposure to any unnecessary injury. And for me, I would feel much better if we could find another ILB who could play the position as well as Matthews did last year and let Matthews do what he is paid to do--rush the passer.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 02, 2015 at 08:21 pm

Overall I'm happy with this draft. I love the Rollins pick. I have been very high on him for a while.
I also think it's a steal to get Hundley in the 5th round. Most projected him to be in the 2nd-3rd round area. He is a guy that can develop behind Rodgers.

Ripkowski will be Kuhns replacement, and should help immediately on special teams.

Ryan I could see be an opening day starter. Kind of one of those under the radar types that is just good and will play his way into the starting spot.

My biggest take away from the draft is they added playmakers, and really improved their special teams. Might not have as many starters as last years draft, but will get a lot of contributors early.

0 points
0
0
EddieLee's picture

May 02, 2015 at 08:05 pm

I'm not confident Kuhn makes the team this year. I see them using a FB less than last year and having two on the roster makes no sense. If the Big Ripkowski shows ability to handle the offensive adjustments and pass pro he very well could bump Kuhn off the roster. Kuhn would most likely be available as a free agent if needed.

0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

May 02, 2015 at 10:37 pm

You're talking about Rodgers' safety blanket, and a guy who can pick up a few yards when needed.

0 points
0
0
zoellner25's picture

May 02, 2015 at 08:27 pm

I think it says alot by Ted that he can dump 3 veteran ILBs, not sign any LB free agents, and then draft a guy in the late rounds who I believe was somewhat of a character risk. Brass must've been pretty fed up with our ILB play to be this bold

0 points
0
0
Otto's picture

May 04, 2015 at 01:18 am

CBS Sports: Round 4, Jake Ryan: A-. "Excellent locker room addition at this point in the draft. Team captain at Michigan with a strong reputation and plays with excellent discipline."

Not a character risk.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 02, 2015 at 09:01 pm

I never had a grasp on this draft. I never came close.

It just might be a good thing that I have no front office job with the Green Bay Packers (don't laugh too hard).

Either TT and/or Dom didn't like any of the MLBs projected to fall to us or TT and or MM really chose BPA and created competition/depth.

I really do like the first 4 picks after viewing some film and reading up on them. Again, I watched ZERO college games this season, so I know nothing about majority of these prospects.

I might love the Ty pick more than any other pick if he betters our KOs, PRs and if he can be utilized like Cobb (backfield runs). I wouldn't mind seeing that 5-Wide come back =)

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 02, 2015 at 09:28 pm

5 WRs could be an option in which it still could be 4 WRs and 1 RB or 3 WRs and 2 RBs. Both Cobb and Montgomery can be used as RBs and could run routes out of the backfield.
I really like adding another Cobb like player to the offense. It gives the offense so much versatility and flexibility. both can play the slot, can be in the backfield and just about whatever else they can come up with.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 03, 2015 at 08:52 am

Absolutely. I hope that pick helps erase some of the inconsistencies we have on Offense at times

I know the Offense has the stats to back it up, but at times -- they let the rest of the team down at critical times. Those 2 Seahawk games, the Lions game, the Saints game and the Bills game...

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 04, 2015 at 06:40 am

Yeah, i completely agree.
The offense did get into these lull's where they just didn't finish drives or couldn't do much. We actually could have used another weapon to be more creative on offense, and to create another mismatch. I do believe Montgomery can provide that. Not to mention the growth of other young players.

I just like the flexibility and options that Montgomery can provide.

0 points
0
0
Zola Davis's picture

May 05, 2015 at 12:36 pm

While I know you're not the only one to use the terminology, I dispise the use of "warroom" and "weapons" in football. I'm not a veteran and the NFL is not war. "draftroom" and "tools" should more than adequately describe the situation.

Lets keep things in perspective.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

May 05, 2015 at 03:34 pm

Meant for someone else?

0 points
0
0
Rick Norman's picture

May 09, 2015 at 08:11 pm

I think that is why McCarthy shifted Cobb into the backfield at times, especially against NE, using Montgomery in that role makes sense as he is bigger than Cobb and was used as a receiver on routes close to the line of scrimmage in 2014.

0 points
0
0
Ibleedgreenmore's picture

May 09, 2015 at 05:21 pm

If they do the 5 WR and with Rodgers we might burn the league up. I know its early but man I thought the team had talent last year.

0 points
0
0
Otto's picture

May 06, 2015 at 09:57 pm

I think you hit the nail on the head.
"Either TT and/or Dom didn't like any of the MLBs projected to fall to us or TT and or MM really chose BPA and created competition/depth."

From what I read (I'm far from being and expert) this was a week ILB class. Taking most of the best prospects in the 1st round would have been a reach.
I think Packer fans are going to be pleased with the kid from Michigan, though.

0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

May 02, 2015 at 09:21 pm

I just saw the list of UDFA the Packers have signed. They've signed RB John Crockett and I'm looking forward to see him run in the preseason games.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 03, 2015 at 09:38 am

I watched some of his film last night. Looks pretty good. Quick and has home run speed. I'd like to see more catching

0 points
0
0
Ibleedgreenmore's picture

May 09, 2015 at 05:23 pm

I saw a path to the draft on Crockett he was of course disappointed in not being drafted. He said he is coming to make this team, dare he go on practice squad but hey anyone can get hurt in preseason it happens each year.

0 points
0
0
Clay Zombo's picture

May 03, 2015 at 01:29 am

Check out UDFA LB Tavarus Dantzler when you get a chance, he looks pretty good.

0 points
0
0
Ibleedgreenmore's picture

May 09, 2015 at 03:23 pm

Man I loved what I saw in that kid, if he can play anything like what I saw in his films he is a keeper.

0 points
0
0
Patrick Helms's picture

May 03, 2015 at 06:56 am

I liked the picks this year, we definitely needed help in the backfield and I hope these players pan out. I really like the fact that they are multi position players. And then there is this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpsMBctOPxE

0 points
0
0
Tom Legener's picture

May 03, 2015 at 08:10 am

Wow, if that video were against SEC teams he would have been the #1 pick. I hope he can play against the big boys like that because if he can we just found another Teddy Treasure.

0 points
0
0
packsmack's picture

May 03, 2015 at 10:36 am

Some of it was against an SEC team. South Carolina was in there. Looks like he was arrested for armed assault at age 18, thus the small school and undrafted status. His Sparq score is awesome though, and the Packers tend to target athletic freaks like that in the late rounds/UDFA. Janis and Johnson the past two years are easy examples of the trend.

0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

May 03, 2015 at 08:29 am

The tape is great. Thanks for posting it. He certainly looks dominate against the level of competition he's playing against. I love it that he runs sideline to sideline. It shows his level of effort and passion for the game. He is a baller. I'll definitely be watching for him this preseason. Maybe TT did find another gem. Let's hope so.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 03, 2015 at 08:45 am

I like big time, big conference players, but this guy looks like he could have played anywhere. I'd like to see the competition at ILB in practice this year.

0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

May 03, 2015 at 12:38 pm

What a freaking wingspan on this dude..

0 points
0
0
Otto's picture

May 04, 2015 at 01:32 am

It seems to me the Packer's LB corps hasn't lacked talent lately, as much as they've lacked aggressiveness. Since Bishop left, there's been no one in the middle that opponents need to fear.
About two minutes into the video he hits a guy so hard a piece of his helmet flies 5 yards down field.
About four minutes in he makes a tackle on the opposite sideline. I like the way he helps his opponent to the ground two yards out of bounds.

I like him!

0 points
0
0
Zola Davis's picture

May 05, 2015 at 12:39 pm

As long as I'm grumpy, I HATE the air raid sirens, too.

0 points
0
0
Amanofthenorth's picture

May 03, 2015 at 08:49 am

A bunch of high twitch guys

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 03, 2015 at 09:37 am

Can't wait for the comments of how great the rest of the NFCN did. 3 teams chasing the Packers for the last 4 years.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

May 03, 2015 at 05:09 pm

Really think the 1st pick was a reach. Thought the rest of TTs draft was excellent. I hope they work out.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 03, 2015 at 09:01 pm

So, if the 1st was a reach and he could've been selected later on, but the rest of the draft was excellent -- where should the 1st have been selected? He would have been excellent somewhere else?

If he's good -- he's good.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 04, 2015 at 07:54 am

The answer is you take him with your second pick if possible and if he has been taken already you don't get him at all.

Your attempt at logic failed utterly, Drealyn. If you're going to mock someone, try for a better argument. If Randall in the 1st is a reach (which clearly implies said player is not BPA), take someone else who is better (insert prospect name, like Brown, Goldman, and IMO a whole bunch more). If Randall is still available with your 2nd pick, jump for joy and pick him, and if he is been taken, you don't get Randall, so you take Rollins. If you think Randall is good (by which I mean BPA) - then he's BPA and you take him because he is BPA and by definition he is not a reach. If your argument is that Randall was BPA at a position of need, that is fine. If you think Randall was the best player available, period, that's fine, you are entitled to your opinion. I never heard TT state that Randall was BPA, but it might well be what TT thinks. We'll never know unless he gives a frank interview on the subject. What are the chances of that?

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 04, 2015 at 08:35 am

First off, I was not mocking anyone. I was actually trying to see if he liked the player selected.

I just don't believe in "reaching". If you feel a player is BPA at the time -- then you select him. I'm assuming that's what TT did there. That simple. We don't know how TT's board was setup.

"I never heard TT state that Randall was BPA, but it might well be what TT thinks"

And that's all that matters!!

I'm not here to say ANYONE is wrong for how they think or feel. I'm just sharing my opinions/thoughts. I've never attacked anyone on here. Well, maybe Danny and/or Cow. But that shouldn't count.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 04, 2015 at 11:59 am

Drealyn,

I am sorry. I thought i was defending Stockholder. I know that some guys on APC have been harsh towards him. APC commenters don't really take well to negative comments about TT, MM, or the FO. I thought Stockholder had been getting some guff, and here he posts a perfectly nice, and on balance, a very positive comment. I myself wrote something about Stockholder being relentlessly negative. He is of course entitled to his opinion, as is everyone.

Again, Drealyn, I am sorry.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 04, 2015 at 02:54 pm

TT said in a post draft interview, "We were surprised Randall was still there." So apparently they were high on him.

0 points
0
0
Otto's picture

May 04, 2015 at 02:07 am

Peace brothers and sisters, remember this was a 12-4 team last year. I'm a little surprised by the anxiety a lot of the post have. As I look at the entirety of this draft, it looks like a draft and develop team loaded up for 2-3 years from now.
Rather than look at this draft and question what they will do for the team this year, look at the 2nd and 3rd year players who should be stepping up.
Defense: Banjo, Bradford, Clinton-Dix, Elliot, Barrington, Pennel, Palmer, Jones, Hyde. Most of these guys have already made a contribution and are expect to step up this year.
Let's be honest about the offense, the biggest problem they will have this year is trying to figure out how to get players through waivers and on the practice squad without having other teams sign them.

Let's take a (somewhat) objective look at this team and their schedule. I know it's May, but if half of those defensive players make a step up, this team has a legit shot at going 16-0.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 04, 2015 at 02:43 pm

TY, its always good to hear a voice of reason. I'll be happy with the playoffs.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 04, 2015 at 07:56 pm

"I'll be happy with the playoffs."

Lol, sorry. That part just sounds like a rival's fan.

0 points
0
0
Ibleedgreenmore's picture

May 09, 2015 at 03:35 pm

Yeah how would like like to pick who stays and goes.

0 points
0
0