Zero Packers on NFL.com's All-Under-25 Team
By Zach Kruse
While somewhat of a surprise, the Green Bay Packers did not receive a single representative on NFL.com's All-Under-25 team.
The list, which was formulated by Elliot Harrison of NFL.com and released on Tuesday, picked 11 offensive players, 12 defensive and two from special teams to represent the best the NFL has to offer under 25 years old.
Receiver Randall Cobb (22 years old), tackle Bryan Bulaga (23), cornerback Casey Hayward (23) and safety Morgan Burnett (24) represented the best chances for Green Bay to crack the list, but none of the four were able to overcome worthy competition.
Cobb was beat out by A.J. Green and Dez Bryant, Bulaga by Trent Williams and Tyron Smith, Hayward by Richard Sherman and Patrick Peterson and Burnett by Earl Thomas and Reshad Jones.
#PACKERSmicroblog
Comments (46)
February 12, 2013 at 08:04 pm
Hard to argue with those players making it over the Packers.
February 13, 2013 at 12:01 am
Minus Dez Bryant. I'd rather have Cobb than that piece of S&*%.
February 13, 2013 at 07:22 am
Based on character, yeah. But when Dez is on he's incredible.
February 12, 2013 at 08:22 pm
Just more evidence that TT is not the draft "genius" that every homer claims. ----- In fact, another draft without some young impact talent will guarantee GB is just another team shooting for the playoffs. ---- Don't be shocked when it happens. Your GM has to be elite to field an elite team.
February 12, 2013 at 08:52 pm
Please tell me who is better than TT
February 12, 2013 at 09:10 pm
GB has AR, CM3 & maybe R. Cobb. The rest of the GB 53 is full of average to mediocre talent.
Any GM who obtains through the draft or FA more talent than AR, CM3 & RC is better. ---- It's actually quite simple when you face that reality.
February 13, 2013 at 11:33 am
Honest question - if you could swap entire rosters with any team in the league, which (if any) would you pick?
February 13, 2013 at 06:05 pm
baltimore
new england
san francisco
seattle
atlanta
giants
February 12, 2013 at 09:36 pm
It could be argued that the GM's of...
SF
BAL
ATL
DEN
NE
NYG
...are all better than TT (no I don't know their names).
Every one of those teams has more impact players than the Packers.
R70's right on this one.
TT's a tad overrated.
The current team is not overly talented.
If not for AR they would struggle to win 7 games (even w/ CMIII and Cobb).
February 13, 2013 at 09:45 am
"If not for AR..."
That's true of every team. Take Brady away from the Pats, Eli from the Giants, Ryan from Atlanta, Peyton from Denver or Flacco from Baltimore and all those teams would struggle to compete. And next year when Alex Smith leaves SF, the same will be true for them.
February 13, 2013 at 11:46 am
I was with you right up until Alex Smith...
February 13, 2013 at 11:59 am
My only point about Smith is that he's an above-average back-up QB. So if you took Kaepernick away from the 49ers, they'd still have Smith, who has been more than servicable for them. That won't be the case next year.
February 13, 2013 at 10:10 am
Cow & Rocky has gotten under my skin too; but leave it to them to spur some conversations, here!
I'll give you BAL; NE and NYG. Possibly. NE and NYG may be more about coaches getting good play out of players.
SF had so many high draft choices from lousy years that they are boom or bust.
ATL is good, but show me a trophy with their name on it. Trading the world for a WR two years ago doesn't strike me as good mgt.
DEN is also good, but like SF, likely to be boom/bust.
TT is steady as she goes, but we're all entitled to disagree.
February 13, 2013 at 10:15 am
If Denver was run so well they wouldn't have been forced to throw $100 million at a 36-year-old QB coming off 4 neck surgeries. Yes, it worked out for the most part, but that's no way to build a franchise for long-term success.
February 13, 2013 at 10:18 am
DEN was a good team in 2011, too. But, yeah. I guess they had all the pieces but QB (I like Tebow, but he is no Manning), so the move made sense. The proof is if Manning can last 2-3 more years.
February 13, 2013 at 10:23 am
I agree, the move "made sense," but only because they've been searching for a franchise QB for 15 years. And you're right, the real test of that signing will be the next 2-3 years.
February 13, 2013 at 11:35 am
What would the basis of that argument be? And don't give me some vague phrase like "impact players". Name names or cite statistics.
February 12, 2013 at 08:59 pm
That's a flimsy conclusion to draw.
February 13, 2013 at 12:07 am
OMG, so TT is at worst a top seven general manager in the NFL. Seriously? The sky is falling, the sky is falling! You guys are some of the biggest glass is half full downers I've met since doing a bunch of downers in college.
Am I a homer? Yes.
Is being a GB Packer fan better than being a fan of roughly 25 + other teams in the NFL? Yes.
We are and will likely be in contention for a very long time because of the draft decisions that Ted Thompson has made. And dumping Bert.
Could TT be better? Yes.
Are many GM's much worse? Yes. Many.
We will once again have a shot at winning a Super Bowl next year, whether Cow thinks we will or not? Yes.
Oh, and Cow, by the way - how'd SF do in the Super Bowl?
SF 24 - NW 17. D-bag.
February 12, 2013 at 10:00 pm
I will give you SF and Balt but the others are a push. Even with a top 5 GM a good scheme and coaching can keep us at the conference championship level for awhile.
February 13, 2013 at 05:35 am
I'm sure most of those guys mentioned above were drafted in the top 15/20 picks. Packers haven't drafted that high in quite a few years but still they contend at a high level. I think TT does pretty well in the draft considering he has little to no opportunity to pick the top prospects each year.
February 13, 2013 at 08:04 am
FWIW, to break this down a little further...
•13 of 23 position players were picked prior to our pick in the 1st rd (many taken much higher)
•2 of 10 remaining we have studs better than the guys chosen (QB - Rodgers and RG - Sitton)
•2 of now remaining 8 we have good young players in those positions as well (CB - Hayward and S - Burnett)
•1 of remaining 6 is a moron...I'll take Cobb over über-talented head case Bryant any day.
•Leaving 5 early to mid round diamonds (the 2 RBs, Gronk, Bowman, and Atkins) that we missed on...along with virtually every other team that passed on them.
February 13, 2013 at 11:26 am
There's no room for this kind of sanity around here.
February 13, 2013 at 06:07 pm
burnett is young... but "good" is a stretch.
he's just a guy.
February 13, 2013 at 09:09 am
This list also speaks to parity. W/ the Packers drafting at the bottom of each round due to their success it becomes harder and harder to pick difference makers. Let's not forget 23 teams passed on AR, TT had to draft a 2nd and two 3rd round picks to get CM3 and Cobb luckily fell to the last pick of the 2nd round. This shows TT was smart enough to pick them when available.
February 13, 2013 at 09:35 am
So what does:
Young team + Low payroll + few studs = Super Bowl contender mean?
I think great coaching.
February 13, 2013 at 09:57 am
i agree with all of this except for the SB contender part.
this is an illusion.
February 13, 2013 at 09:51 am
Point 1 - One guy's opinion of the best under-25 players is evidence of nothing.
Point 2 - I'd put TT up with any other GM in the league. Ozzie Newsome is great, no doubt, especially at targeting aging vets with a little left in the tank. SF has a great collection of talent, but most of it was drafted in the top 10 - I want to see how they fare drafting in the mid-to-late 20s years after year like TT does. The Giants are well run. So is Atlanta. TT isn't perfect, no one is. But I wouldn't trade him for anyone.
February 13, 2013 at 09:58 am
i'd trade him for anyone who can get us MULTIPLE SB's.
TT will be gone before the Pack gets there again.
February 13, 2013 at 10:03 am
"TT will be gone before the Pack gets there again."
Baseless conjecture.
February 13, 2013 at 10:40 am
true.
just join' w/ my gut on this one (and the odds).
February 13, 2013 at 10:49 am
And we all know how accurate your gut has been...I think it's time you pull a George Costanza and start doing the opposite.
February 13, 2013 at 10:42 am
When did NE win its last SB?
My point is that the ticket is to make the playoffs on an upswing; then stay hot and have a few good bounces to bring home the Lombardi.
All SB teams have doubters thru the year, but they get in position by making the playoffs each year consistently.
February 13, 2013 at 10:18 am
Arguing subjective lists in the off-season, good times.
Mark Sanchez made this list in prior years, I believe (#eyefortalent).
February 13, 2013 at 10:38 pm
Kids.
February 13, 2013 at 11:38 am
I posted this a couple weeks ago on a different article, but it seems like it's needed again (updated post-Superbowl):
"Here are the top ten teams in terms of win percentage over the past three years:
1. Patriots: 39-9 reg season; playoffs – 3 appearances, 3 wins, 3 losses, no superbowl wins.
2. Packers: 36-12 reg season; playoffs – 3 appearances, 5 wins, 2 losses, one superbowl win.
3. Falcons: 36-12 reg season; playoffs – 3 appearances, 1 win, 3 losses, no superbowl wins.
4. Ravens: 34-14 reg season; playoffs – 3 appearances, 6 wins, 2 losses, one superbowl win.
5. Saints: 31-17 reg season; playoffs – 2 appearances, 1 win, 2 losses, no superbowl wins.
6. 49ers: 30-17 reg season; playoffs – 2 appearances, 3 wins, 2 losses, no superbowl wins.
7. Bears: 29-19 reg season; playoffs – 1 appearance, 1 win, 1 loss, no superbowl wins.
8. Steelers: 29-19 reg season; playoffs – 2 appearances, 2 wins, 2 losses, no superbowl wins.
9. Giants: 28-20 reg season; playoffs – 1 appearance, 4 wins, no losses, 1 superbowl win.
10. Texans: 28-20 reg season; playoffs – 2 appearances, 2 wins, 2 losses, zero superbowl wins.
To recap: we have the second-highest win percentage in the regular season over the last three years; we have the second-most playoff wins (Ravens now have one more) over the last three years; we are one of only four teams to make the playoffs in each of the last three years;
we have won a superbowl in the last three years.
What team would you rather have rooted for over the last three years?"
February 13, 2013 at 11:41 am
Shae McClellin
February 13, 2013 at 11:58 am
what if?
February 13, 2013 at 12:19 pm
Devon Still had similar stats to Worthy at mid-season. Has he behaved?
February 13, 2013 at 12:23 pm
If you lived through draft season last year that's all cow could muster to basically any question for about 6 consecutive weeks (he likely never watched the kid play). So in response to some great prospective from 'Idiot Fan' I thought I would give a cow level, in depth rebuttal....Shea McClellin. Low and behold, cow doesn't disappoint by choosing to respond to me with a 'what if', instead of 'Idiot Fan's' post.
Cow in a nutshell.....
February 13, 2013 at 12:18 pm
Good analysis. Doesn't cover everything, but not bad for discussion.
So I give higher props to ATL; forgot about PIT, though it looks like they've slumped (ing).
Da Bears still suck!
February 13, 2013 at 12:21 pm
if you're not getting better, you're getting worse.
Packers are progressively getting worse.
February 13, 2013 at 01:39 pm
But, but, but we have so much young talent on our team, what is the rest of the NFL missing?
Don't they know the Pack does not win because it has the best QB in the league but because of youngsters like Marshall Newhouse, Jerron McMillian, and Devon House?
We in Green Bay know we have the youngest, most talented roster in the league even if others are deluded enough to think otherwise.
February 13, 2013 at 04:06 pm
I think that TT does an excellent job of keeping the roster fresh with young, hungry players and very low dead money in the cap.
I dont think I'm delusional in supporting TT; but others may disagree. The stats above about win/loss and playoffs speak for themselves; as does the stats that I won't look up, but know exist, that indicate how many plays are produced by players around the league that TT has fingerprints on.
February 15, 2013 at 12:26 pm
I just don't understand people who say they are 'football' people. Look. Its rather easy. The TOP high school players go the the TOP colleges in Div I. That is how it works. If they play up to potential they get drafted, often in the first or second rounds.
The lesser players in high school go Div II or smaller div I schools, with poorer coaching, ans skill development and end up 5th, 6th, 7th or undrafted rookies.
The later are the guys TT has been picking up a lot. These guys are not play makers, never were, but just bodies and not that talented. They can play backup roles but the Pack have then as first stringers mostly and the results, especially on Defense show clearly.
You get what you get. This Pack team, other that a couple of guys, are not talented.
February 15, 2013 at 12:38 pm
I can no longer differentiate trolling from profound stupidity. Time to not respond to either, guess.