Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Re-Grading the Packers 2010 NFL Draft

By Category

Re-Grading the Packers 2010 NFL Draft

Every late April and early May, an assemblage of "grades" commences for the NFL draft that was just completed. Of this mostly absurd and meaningless task, I remain as guilty as the next.

The need for instant and easy analysis is not difficult to understand. Fans want to know now—not later, when it's more appropriate—how an incoming crop of players stacks up.

However, a true grading of a draft class should really be reserved for at least three years into the future. Unlike immediate post-draft grades, a three-year window of observation provides the opportunity to more fully understand and correctly analyze players.

With the 2012 NFL season concluded, the 2010 draft class now has three years of experience to work with. It's now worth our time to look back on how that draft unfolded.

Below, we re-grade the seven draft picks the Packers made during the 2010 NFL draft. All stats and snap counts provided by Pro Football Focus.

1.23 OT Bryan Bulaga, Iowa

A true candidate to emerge as a Pro Bowl-quality tackle in 2012, Bulaga took a small step back in his third year. The right tackle allowed bigger defensive ends to get into his chest, and his balance against smaller, faster rushers was an issue. The result was as many total pressures allowed over the first five games of last season (24; three sacks, three QB hits, 18 pressures) as in 17 games in 2011 (24; 1/2/21). To his credit, Bulaga recovered to allow just three pressures over his last four weeks. Unfortunately, a hip injury suffered against the Arizona Cardinals knocked him out for the rest of the season. Barring a setback, he should be healthy in plenty of time for the 2013 season.

Despite his early struggles in 2012, Bulaga still has the skill set to start on the right side of the Packers offensive line for the next 10 years, and a move to the left side could still eventually happen. He's tough, has ideal size (6-5, 315 lbs.) and often surprises with his athleticism. In 2011, Bulaga was certainly among the NFL's best right tackles. Thompson needed a tackle in April 2010, and he appears to have picked the right one. It's very difficult to argue the Packers would have been better off with any of the 10 players picked behind Bulaga: Dez Bryant, Tim Tebow, Dan Williams, Devin McCourty, Jared Odrick, Kyle Wilson, Jahvid Best, Jerry Hughes, Patrick Robinson and Rodger Saffold.

Grade: A-

 

2.56 DE Mike Neal, Purdue

The three-year story of Neal is one of tantalizing promise and disappointing absence. Over two games during his rookie season, Neal flashed the kind of strength at the point of attack that enticed Thompson to take him in the second round. In Week 5, the Washington Redskins simply couldn't block him. However, a shoulder injury suffered that same week knocked him out for the rest of the 2010 season. His injury luck hasn't changed much. Since entering the NFL, Neal has played in just 20 of the 48 potential games, logging only 574 total snaps. Shoulder and knee problems have been recurring.

While Neal did come back from a four-game substance abuse suspension in 2012 to put together his finest year (11 games, 4.5 sacks), it's worth pondering whether he will ever be a starting option at defensive end in the 3-4. The 49ers steamrolled him in the Divisional Round. He might end up as nothing more than a situational interior rusher. Among those picked after Neal in the second round are RB Ben Tate and LB Brandon Spikes.

Grade: D+

 

3.71 S Morgan Burnett, Georgia Tech

Thompson sent the No. 86 and No. 122 picks to move up and get Burnett, who came into the NFL with a ball-hawking reputation. Over three years and 36 games, Burnett hasn't exactly lived up to that billing. He has just six career interceptions. That said, former Packers safety Nick Collins had just four interceptions in his first three seasons; over his next three, he picked off 17. Maybe the lightbulb can still come on in the turnover department.

While an ACL injury halted his rookie season early, Burnett has since played in all but 16 of the team's defensive snaps over the last two seasons. That availability has allowed Burnett to register a team-high 230 total tackles since 2011. Still, Burnett is far too often reacting to a play instead of making one. He certainly can't claim to be among the NFL's elite safeties, but he's probably got a good case to be in the upper half. To take the next step, Burnett needs get his hands on more passes. Considering both Kam Chancellor (5.133) and Reshad Jones (5.163) were picked two rounds later, it's hard to love the pick.

Grade: B-

 

5.154 TE Andrew Quarless, Penn State

As a fifth-round pick, Quarless was expected to marinate on the Packers' bench while the takeover of tight end Jermichael Finley continued into 2010. For the better part of five games, that plan worked: Finley began an 80-catch pace, and Quarless was needed on just 12 snaps. When Finley went down against Washington, that plan radically changed. Quarless emerged as the de facto starter at tight end, a role the rookie performed admirably as the Packers advanced to and won the Super Bowl. While never a dangerous receiving option, Quarless held his own.

A year later, Quarless began to carve out a real role as the offense's go-to blocker at tight end. However, disaster struck when he blew out his knee on special teams in Week 13 against the Giants. Quarless hasn't played another down. Looking ahead to 2013, it's perfectly fine to wonder if Quarless can do enough to make the 53-man roster next August. His climb could be uphill if Finley returns. Among the tight ends drafted after Quarless: Brody Eldridge, Fendi Onobun, Dennis Morris, Nate Byham and Anthony McCoy.

Grade: C

 

5.169 OT Marshall Newhouse, TCU

Few would have guessed that within a year and a half of being drafted, Newhouse would be starting at left tackle in Green Bay. But that's exactly what happened, as Newhouse was forced to take over for the injured Chad Clifton in Week 5 of 2011. The results since have been mostly mixed, but there's little doubt that Newhouse has improved tremendously as Aaron Rodgers' blindside protector. His pass-blocking is now more than sufficient.

However, Newhouse is a clear liability in the run game, and few will argue he's among the game's top half of starting left tackles. Both realities are unlikely to drastically change. Can the Packers get back to the NFL's peak with an average player anchoring at left tackle? That's certainly a debatable notion. If healthy, 2011 first-round pick Derek Sherrod could supplant Newhouse at left tackle. Considering no consistent starter at offensive tackle was taken after Newhouse, the pick still has to be graded highly.

Grade: B+

 

6.193 RB James Starks, Buffalo

Despite missing his senior season to a shoulder injury, Thompson rolled the dice and took the promising Starks in the sixth round. However, the tall, well-built running back has continued to battle injuries at the NFL level. Knee, hamstring and ankle problems have mostly handcuffed his potential impact over three years.

That said, Starks was instrumental to Green Bay's Super Bowl run in 2010—solidifying a struggling running back position to bring the offense some balance over the final two months. If you include the postseason, Starks remains the last Packers running back to rush for 100 yards (at Philadelphia, 123). Over 22 career games, Starks has rushed for OK numbers of 934 yards and two touchdowns. He now needs a healthy offseason and training camp to ensure he's still on the roster in 2013. No running back picked after Starks has run for more yards since 2010.

Grade: B-

 

7.230 C.J. Wilson, East Carolina

Rarely do teams find starters in the seventh round, but Thompson did just that with Wilson. Over three seasons, he has made 11 starts (seven in 2012) over 42 total games. Whether Wilson is a worthy starter is another discussion. While mostly stout against the run, Wilson offers little in terms of collapsing the pocket and isn't suited to play three downs. But what more can you reasonably expect out of the 230th overall pick in a draft? Wilson has 3.5 career sacks and 11 starts. That's likely 3.5 and 11 more than anyone expected back in 2010.

Grade: B

 

Overall

Bulaga is clearly the gem of this class. At No. 23 overall, there's very little you can fault Thompson for in picking a top-10 player at an important position. Bulaga's best football is still ahead of him. Burnett is a steady player who looked ready to contribute from Day 1, and Newhouse was a nice find in the fifth round. From there, the class doesn't "wow." Neal has been a disappointment, and both Quarless and Starks could be on the street next season thanks to injuries. Wilson is a below-average starter and needs to be replaced. One big plus for Thompson: All seven of the players are still on the roster, and all seven have contributed at some point. Not many draft classes can say both after three years.

Grade: B-

  • Like Like
  • 2 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (73) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Evan's picture

"All seven of the players are still on the roster, and all seven have contributed at some point."

That's what really stuck out to me about this draft.

Idiot Fan's picture

I can already see the future comments on this article...

"These guys are all mediocre. They're just guys. I wish we had the guys on:

[Team A]
[Team B]
[Team C]
[Team D, which didn't even make the playoffs]

They have PLAYMAKERS. TT is average and got lucky on his one superbowl win. We won't win another one for fifty years."

Evan's picture

ha. Sad but true...

cow42's picture

every one of these guys is an average NFL player.
average NFL players do not get you super bowl trophies.

difference makers do.

go ahead and be content with average players and division championships.

average sucks.

not a single player in the draft of 2010 IS a playmaker or WILL EVER BE a playmaker.

not even the greenest and goldest glasses can argue that.

Idiot Fan's picture

I'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word "average".

And every one of those guys was on a team that won the Super Bowl. Bulaga played a critical role.

cow42's picture

every super bowl team has average players. but the game is not won by those average players. the average players didn't get them there.

Idiot Fan's picture

Not true. Because of the salary cap and the extremely competitive nature of the league, you just can't have superstars at every position (or even most positions). Yes, you do need some superstars to win the Superbowl (preferably with one at QB), but you also need a whole bunch of solid, if not spectacular, role players. That's why the teams that rely on the draft (Steelers, Packers, Patriots, Ravens, Manning's Colts, and now the 49ers) outperform those who chase after "difference makers" (Redskins, Cowboys, Eagles, etc.).

Evan's picture

Uncanny, Idiot Fan.

cow42's picture

how can you not be angry that Rodgers' prime years are being wasted?

Evan's picture

I reject the premise of your question.

Rocky70's picture

"How can you not be angry that Rodgers’ prime years are being wasted?"

Cow, evidently many of these people here have already forgotten that 16 years of BF netted only one SB trophy because of inept management. It's conceivable that AR could play several more years & never play in another NFC Championship, much less another SB. ---- All again because of inept management. --- 30 years (conceivably) & only two SBs. That's sad.

cow42's picture

just because they're still on the roster doesn't mean they're necessarily good. just means there's no one better on the roster.

Pack Morris's picture

Well dang. Perspective, courtesy of Zach Kruse.

RC Packer Fan's picture

Great job Zach. I completely agree with your draft grades for the 2010 draft. To me I don't disagree with any of the grades.
The thing that stands out to me about this draft class is the amount of injuries they have had.
Bulaga, Neal, Burnett, Quarless, Newhouse all have been on the IR. Starks has been by far the most injured Packer, and Wilson missed some games this year.
If these players were not injured I feel each would be better and would have better grades.

Denver's picture

"The thing that stands out to me about this draft class is the amount of injuries they have had."
My thought exactly. I know they're part of the game, but that's the theme of this group to me.

Chad Toporski's picture

The only grade I particularly disagree with is Marshall Newhouse's. A little too high for his performances... B- if you ask me.

Evan's picture

I still think there is merit to the idea of moving Bulaga to the left and letting Newhouse, Barclay and Sherrod battle it out for RT. Am I crazy?

Denver's picture

Nope, that's exactly what I hope happens as well...assuming Bulaga is 100%.

Chad Toporski's picture

I'm not sure if Sherrod is suited for RT. I think he's a natural "lefty." Meanwhile, Newhouse has played LT long enough to wear it's probably his most comfortable spot. As for Barclay, I think that while he performed decently at RT, he's a better Guard. (Though he'll probably remain that "swing" guy as a backup.)

Finally, Bulaga has the potential to make the RT spot rock solid. I would rather have that than possibly reducing his effectiveness at LT. Better to only have to give assistance to one side than both.

But that's just what I think, and some of it is based on pure speculation.

Evan's picture

I think those are all valid points.

My main thinking is Bulaga is the best tackle on the team (and played LT in college) so he should be protecting Rodger's blindside while the lesser players battle it out for the "lesser" tackle spot. Though I do vaguely recall some talk a couple seasons ago that the distinction between LT and RT has become sort of irrelevant or overblown.

And I think there is validity to the argument "if it's not broke, don't fix it." Then again, I think it's possible switching those guys around could strengthen both positions, but that's just speculation.

Chad Toporski's picture

Bulaga is also better in the running game than Newhouse. (Not sure about Sherrod, and Barclay seems to do pretty well in that area.) Considering you generally want the strong side tackle as your best run blocker, I don't think I'd want to see Newhouse over there.

MarkinMadison's picture

If you believe the pundits neither Sherrod nor Newhouse is a RT. Both are described as more finesse. I think the experiment gone horribly wrong of Sherrod at LG confirms this talk. I hope Sherrod is healthy. I'd really love to see him bulked up now and ready to take on the job. Newhouse is o.k., but competition would be good for both of them. Newhouse's contract will also be up after 2014. With all the big deals on the table in the next two years I don't know if the Packers will be willing to invest money in Newhouse in 2014.

Derek's picture

Starks' grade way too high. He's a C- running back because he's never on the freaking field.

Charlie M's picture

Grading a draft 3 years later is all about return. If not for Starks, the Packers don't win SB XLV. That's a fact. So a 6th rd pick was a necessary part of a title team. That's like loading up on Apple stock in the late 90's

PackerNation's picture

I think this is a pretty good assessment, both individually and collectively.

I might quibble on Neal. Neal is a starter in the 2-4-5 nickel that we play on a majority of downs. I think it's unfair to single out Neal as getting "steamrolled" by SF, since just about everybody on defense had a bad day. He was left in a difficult spot early on when both edge rushers ran behind the QB and Neal was responsible...alone...for stopping him if he tried to get out of the pocket. That's a bad mismatch.

Newhouse, because of where he was selected and what he has done, is easily worth the grade he received.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx

The comments about "average" players remind me of what I learned early on about football: Most games are not won, they are lost, and they are lost by penalties, turnovers, and missed assignments. "Average" players may not win games for you, but they certainly can lose games for you, and I'll take solid, reliable, average players on my team anytime so that the good work done by my "playmakers" isn't undone by a guy who can't make an average play.

MarkinMadison's picture

+1. Re the "average player" take, nicely done sir. My only quibble is that we do need another playmaker on defense. Someway, somehow.

But I've been overly critical of the OL this year. With Bulaga out or playing hurt (IMO) all year, and with Saturday having no push, I got down on them. Could Newhouse, Lang or Sitton be replaced? Sure. But even the Packers' patch-work line this year was the envy of the rest of the NFC North.

PackerNation's picture

Our preferred starting line would have been , left to right, Sherrod, Lang, Saturday, Sitton, and Bulaga. And that's a pretty solid group. But when we were playing Lang at RT we essentially had a backup, a backup, an end-of-the-road-vet, Sitton, and a backup. That's really only one solid starter at that position out of the whole group.

If we can get Sherrod, Lang, EDS, Sitton, and Bulaga all healthy and playing together, I think this line will look pretty darn good. And with Newhouse and Barclay as backups, our depth will be as good as it's been in quite while.

cow42's picture

the only chance sherrod has of ever starting a game is if the guy in front of him gets injured.

dude couldn't beat out lang or newhouse when he was healthy... and neither of those guys are world beaters (to say the least).

Rocky70's picture

"Left tackle Marshall Newhouse allowed a team-high 54 total disruptions (nine sacks, eight quarterback hits, 37 hurries), but improved his overall grade from an NFL-worst -32.0 in 2011 to a more respectable -4.6 this season. Newhouse’s biggest struggles still come in the running game, where he graded out at -12.3—worst among NFL tackles."

Zach --- words look familiar??

Wow !! A grade of B+ ---- Really.

Zach Kruse's picture

He was drafted with the 169th overall pick. Now he's a serviceable starter at the one of game's most difficult positions. No other tackle taken after him has done much of anything in the NFL. Yes. B+. Really.

Chad Toporski's picture

If I understand Zach, part of the draft grade takes into account the draft position.

If player A and player B are both equally good, but A was a 1st round pick and B was a 5th round pick, then B would probably get a slightly higher grade for performing above his draft position. The team was able to get more value with B than A.

Zach Kruse's picture

Absolutely, Chad. In grading a draft, you can't just dissect the player.

Rocky70's picture

I love it!! --- Change the rules to fit your analysis. --- Please. Not everyone who comes here is 15 years old.

packeraaron's picture

Um, he's not changing the rules. He's trying to help you understand them.

But keep on being a dick instead of adding anything worthwhile.

Zach Kruse's picture

There are rules now? I graded the draft. How can draft position NOT factor into the grade? If anything, I think you're the only changing the rules. Go troll somewhere else if this site isn't old enough for you.

Idiot Fan's picture

Zach, Rocky is right, there are rules that exist for this sort of thing, and it goes like this:

Did [player name] win MVP of the Super Bowl? No? Grade: F.

So we have 52 F's and one A. That averages out to ... F+. WE SUCK.

MarkinMadison's picture

I'm with Zach. The point of grading the draft is to grade the skill of the GM at picking. By necessity this means you are evaluating the value for the spot picked. Go back and re-read the evaluations. Zach is consistent and correct in his approach.

Rocky70's picture

Draft position has nothing to do with a team's success. If a player grades out badly, it matters little when he was drafted.

The truth is clear. Newhouse graded last in the NFL in 2011 in pass protection & last in the NFL in 2012 in run blocking. B+ ?? --- Not even close.

Students would love you as a teacher.

Jay's picture

He's drafting the draft class. That is distinct from an overall grade...

packeraaron's picture

<em>Draft position has nothing to do with a team’s success. </em>

But is has everything to do with the exercise of grading a draft three years on.

Rocky70's picture

Don't you have a meaningless slide-show to put together over at B/R?? --- Maybe something like "the greatest players to ever wear the jersey #17". Then you could do 18, 19 &amp; so on. --- LOL

Chad Toporski's picture

When in doubt, throw out the straw man insult.

Rocky70's picture

I still love the ol' strawman argument ---- except it still doesn't change the truth.

RC Packer Fan's picture

WOW.... Some people just don't get it.
Draft grades are based on a player, When they were drafted and how well they performed in that drafted position.

People want to complain about Newhouse mostly because he hasn't been a stud. He was drafted in the 5th round, he is not supposed to be a stud. He has been serviceable. Is he a top 10 tackle in the league, No. But for being drafted in the 5th round and for as many games as he has started, he was a very good draft choice. And despite what people want to say he has gotten better each game he has started. I completely agree with the Grade.

Fudding's picture

Come on people, the grades are for that pick in the draft. If you look at the history of the draft, if anyone contributes that's drafted after round 3, you could make an argument that it should be at least a B if not an A. I think Ted's drafts have spoiled some people around here. Go back and look at some of Wolf's drafts, or especially pre Wolf, then you'll be happy with this draft.

Rocky70's picture

Absurd ---- That would make all undrafted free agents that make the 53 man roster as 'grade A' players.

Tramon Williams doesn't even grade out aa an "A".

bdhustle's picture

Draft grades are definitely dependent on position within the draft. The executive who finds an undrafted free agent who makes the team and contributes deserves an A or at least a B for finding the player. The player doesn't necessarily get the same grade.

Tramon gets an A for his production relative to draft position - in this case undrafted
His performance this year when compared to all CB's is a B at best.
His performance this year with respect to his salary would probably be a C.

Lars's picture

B- is being generous with this draft. C is more like it. neal is an injury bust and in no way replaces Cullen Jenkins, which should be the real test of a pick instead of the payers drafted AFTER each pick who happen to play the same position. Starks &lt; Ryan Grant and another injury fail. Newhouse is the epitome of average at LT. Quarless? Not much and then blew out his knee.

They did get 3 starters, but nothing special in this draft. Looking at 2011 and 2012, this draft is about the norm in Green Bay these days.

bdhustle's picture

Player development occurs mostly during the offseason workouts and with reps during games. We all forget that all of these players lost their first offseason because of the labor impasse. In the case of Quarless he lost his second offseason secondary to injury. Although it doesn't affect their current draft grade, their development up to this point may have been affected.

Bulaga, assuming his recovery from injury, should resume his position as an above average and potentially elite RT.

Neal, Burnett, Quarless and Newhouse are still ascending players. Their ultimate draft grade is still TBD.

Starks will probably be forever limited by injury.

Wilson is who he is. Limited by his physical ability but a good run stopper and adequate rotation DL.

QOTSA1's picture

You absolutely need to take draft position in to consideration when grading a draft. That being said, I think the grades for Quarless, Starks and Wilson are pretty generous.

I would agree with Lars that this is closer to a C draft overall. And although it's early, with the exception of Cobb, I don't see anyone from 2011's draft standing out.

I wonder how much this team misses John Schneider? He has found some real gems in Seattle the past few years. He got killed for this past this past years draft, but it looks like he selected some really good players.

Evan's picture

I think House, DJ Smith and, yes, Sherrod all have a chance to stand out.

QOTSA1's picture

I forgot that House was even selected in that draft. He showed promise in the preseason, hopefully he can stay healthy next year.

And I hope Sherrod comes back healthy this year. We didn't get to see much of him yet, and the Packers didn't do him any favors by trying him out at guard in a shortened preseason.

Lou's picture

Thompson's drafts overall quality without a high pick each year have been good to excellent and his non-drafted free agent signings have to be the best in the NFL, it is hard to argue about his level of success. However, columns like this are great for the fans that watch their teams with a sharper focus than the average fan, it is also fun to view the local opinions (journalists/fans) with the so called EXPERT draftniks on cable. I loved it a couple years ago when William Henderson was on with Mel Kiper and he gave a low evaluation of a player and Henderson said, "I bet you will be as wrong about him as you were about me coming out, you said I'd be lucky to make the roster and I player 12 years with a couple of Pro Bowls."

Ruppert's picture

Rules?

"This isn't 'Nam, Smoky. This is bowling. There are rules."

Of course you figure in draft position when grading a draft. That's the argument for ripping on AJ Hawk. And it's legit.

"Has the whole world gone crazy!?"

I love this blog, but the same couple idiots that constantly troll this place with the same redundant refrains are really taking away from the quality writing by the various authors. I frequently skip the responses, because I know I'm going to see the same garbage from the same dickheads.

This was a well-written, fair piece. Period. It doesn't warrant the now predictable whining about the talent. Practically Any piece written these days invariably turns into the same denigration of the team or Thompson. Why don't you clowns take up an interest in partisan politics and go pollute those types of blogs. THAT'S where you belong.

"Am I the only one left who gives a shit about the rules?!"

FITZCORE 1252&#039;S EVO's picture

"I love this blog, but the same couple idiots that constantly troll this place with the same redundant refrains are really taking away from the quality writing by the various authors. I frequently skip the responses, because I know I’m going to see the same garbage from the same dickheads."
I used to play along, and even got a kick out of back-and-fourths with the incessant whiners. But then I realized, these guys weren't joking, they really were tools. Now... I feel exactly what you described above. I'm just over it. Over them. Well put Ruppert.

Look at the one idiot who bashed the Pack all year, then laughed it off as a big joke. NEWSFLASH PEOPLE, he still bashes them every chance he gets. I fed that troll, but learned my lesson... Never again. PackSmack had it nailed from day 1. We as a people need to stop feeding them.

Nagler, or Zach... Post a sign up page for people to pledge to not feed the trolls. All serious posters will sign it. We can hold each other responsible, and get this place respectable again.

Rocky70's picture

Suddenly Fitz is a reformer. LOL.

There's nothing wrong with the many varied views that exist. One losing season (2013?) and many PackFans will be yelling louder than anything you've heard thus far. Be prepared. NO team can lose as many impact players as GB has lost in the last two years (especially with no replacements) &amp; still be elite.

FITZCORE 1252&#039;S EVO's picture

Yaaaaawn... Somebody hear something? Probably just my dog farting... Kinda sounded like it.

Rocky70's picture

Sorry, Fitz, but a reformer?? (remember when you were always the troll?)

It's still a resounding --- LOL.

FITZCORE 1252&#039;S EVO's picture

Snore... No, actually I don't. Never been a troll, never will be.

Ruppert's picture

Either that or we can all independently pledge to "pretend" to rip the team constantly for 6 months in the name of superstition. Because THAT'S just effin' brilliant.

cow42's picture

yeah - let's just hold hands and dance around in a circle.
"yippee the packers can do no wrong! they have no equal!"

face it...
next years' opponents are brutal.

right now the offensive line looks like it's gonna be...
nhouse, lang, eds, sitton, bulaga

u.g.l.y.

right now the defensive front seven is...
wilson, pickett, raji, matthews, bishop, hawk, perry

y.u.c.k.

right now our lead backs look like...
harris, green

o.u.c.h.

right now our safety tandem is...
burnett, coin flip

y.i.k.e.s.

right now we're one injury away from a starting WR trio of...
jones/cobb/nelson (choose 2), boykin

b.l.a.h.

this team is...
rodgers, matthews, sitton, hayward, cobb, nelson, jones, and a bunch of C+ to D- players.

can't wait for zero free agent help and a great draft filled with 2010 type C+ talent.

the Pack is spiraling down the drain, folks.

7-9 here we come.

Jay's picture

Love that crystal ball you got...

Idiot Fan's picture

You know, for a long time I found your schtick frustrating and annoying, but honestly, now I just feel bad for you. Football isn't any fun for you, is it?

cow42's picture

good football is.

Ruppert's picture

Varied views is one thing. Hell, I'm happy to rip the Packers when I think they deserve it. It's not like I fall lock-step with every move or non-move this team makes.

It's not about varied views. It's really about the sheer volume of the same old, same old. Idiot Fan accurately predicted the impending tired, regurgitated nonsense post that followed. Not only is that downright hilarious, but it's a pretty good indicator that the predicted post (and the dozen same old, same old posts ripping the team that followed) are unnecessary and unwanted.

Believe whatever you want. State your opinion. Try to be intelligent, not belligerent. Then shut up and go away like a normal blogger.

steven's picture

26-6 regular season the past 2 seasons, chill. The packers fans that suggest we buy alot into free agency for a few more need to realize something... anyone who needs a reality check, check how well the eagles did

KennyPayne's picture

Packer fans should definitely check out the Eagles.

But perhaps they should also check on the Ravens who had free agents starting at Center, Left Tackle, Fullback, Cornerback, and Safety when they won the Super Bowl 12 days ago. Oh, and I almost forgot, the guy on the cover of SI who returned the 2nd half kickoff for a TD and was the Ravens' 3rd WR, Jacoby Jones, he too was a free agent pickup last offseason.

Throw in WR Anquan Boldin who Baltimore traded a 4th round draft pick for (and who had 2 TDs in the Super Bowl) and it is clear the Ravens, unlike the Packers, do not hesitate to acquire veteran talent through free agency and the draft.

CSS's picture

You might want to go back and look at the Packers 2010 roster and think really hard about the point you think you're making. Also, the Raves are a draft and develop team with Newsome just like the Packers and Thompson. The FA's they acquire are low compensation low risk signings for training camp. They make it, fine. They don't, out the door.

The franchises are built and sustained in almost identical fashion. The only exception, Thompson would have let Ray Lewis go 2 years ago, and rightfully so. He's been awful.

Evan's picture

True. But Newsome is fantastic at getting those last gasps out of aging vets.

CSS's picture

Packers added Tim Mathsay, Howard Green and Eric Walden that year. All three were far from perfect but played critical roles in stretches. No different than guys like Bryant McKinnie who, fortunately for the Ravens, managed to lose about 100 lbs. and round into shape just entering the playoffs.

Chad Toporski's picture

Howard Green, anyone?

Bomdad's picture

TT' s drafts are good enough to get people to donate $250 apiece for worthless stock certificates.

redlights's picture

Seven out of seven draft picks that are on the roster for three years is not a C grade. Anyone care to look up the average longevity of the other 31 teams' 2010 draft. THAT is what grading a draft would entail.

That said, the only zinger I have for Zach is it would have been nice to be consistent by posting the position-specific stats of each player for all three years, and later draft choices of the same position; then compare the pick to the next 10 picks taken after him. That would be a very complete comparison to other players at that position and the comparable players at that draft position.

My $.02

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Tickets

Quote

"The Bears still suck!"
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "