Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Draft Profile: Josh Allen- Why He's a Top 5 Talent Worth Trading First Round Draft Capital to Acquire

By Category

Draft Profile: Josh Allen- Why He's a Top 5 Talent Worth Trading First Round Draft Capital to Acquire

With the NFL Draft just over a month away, I will be starting a short series profiling several prospects that the Packers could select with their first round picks.  During this series, I will be examining players that Green Bay could select if they traded up, traded down, or stayed pat and didn't trade at all.  For the first article in this series, I wanted to examine a prospect that I believe Brian Gutekunst should invest his first-round draft capital to acquire if an opportunity presents itself.  The player I would most like to see Brian Gutekunst trade for is Josh Allen, Kentucky's multi-faceted pass rushing specialist.

The reality is, Green Bay trading up in the first round to make a big splash rarely happens, but I am here to make the case for why trading the 12th and 30th picks for Josh Allen under the right circumstances is the right move. Before you all tar and feather me for wanting to trade up into the top 5, please try and go into this scenario with an open mind.  

I understand that Green Bay's mentality has always been to trade down and accumulate multiple draft picks so that they have more than one chance to draft a starting player with pro bowl caliber talent.  The rationale for doing this is sound and has worked at times, but I believe that the franchise would benefit from occasionally altering this stance under special circumstances.

Although I understand the need to accumulate draft capital in a league dominated by the salary cap, because of the need to have controllable players on team-friendly contracts, there are always exceptions to the rule.  Ladies, and Gentlemen, I am here to say, Kentucky edge rusher Josh Allen is the exception to the rule.

When I brought up the scenario of trading the 12th and the 30th pick to Oakland for the 4th overall pick in one of my previous articles, many of you thought I was crazy and instantly tried to diminish Allen's value as a top 5 prospect.

You said he wasn't worthy of trading first round capital because he was overrated and overhyped. You said he had a 50-50 chance of being "bust" potential like Vernon Gholston or AJ Hawk (Take it easy on AJ Hawk, but point taken). Finally, you told me trading two first rounders for yet another edge rusher is not the Packer thing to do because it is a foolish expenditure of draft capital when you have already signed Za'Darius and Preston Smith.

Trust me, I have heard all of the detractors loud and clear but let's set a couple of things straight; one, you are not trading away your entire draft for a single player, and two, when has having a dominant front seven ever been a bad thing? 

Not to sound cliche, but defense still does win championships, and a nasty front seven improves the overall integrity of the defense and makes the secondary's job easier.  Pairing Josh Allen with Za'Darius and Preston Smith would give the Packers three up and coming young edge rushers to compliment their already dominant defensive line trio of Kenny Clark, Mike Daniels, and Dean Lowry.

Don't just take my word for it, let's examine Josh Allen's entire body of work and see how his unique skill set could translate into the NFL.  Allen has a multi-faceted skill set; he can rush the passer as well drop back into coverage and patrol the middle of the field.  I believe that Allen's skill set could allow him to see some reps as a middle linebacker in Mike Pettine's exotic system, in addition to his traditional role as an outside linebacker.  

Allen displays his well rounded and already polished game by his ability to be a reliable tackler in any situation.  He had 88 total tackles, 56 of which were solo tackles to go along with 4 passes defensed.  Allen's secondary stats show that he could translate into a dual-threat player similar to Khalil Mack.

Josh Allen 2018 stats: 17.0 sacks, 21.5 tackles for loss, 5 forced fumbles, 56 solo tackles, 88 total tackles, 4 Passes Defensed

2019 NFL Combine Measurables- 40-yard dash: 4.63, Broad Jump: 118, Vertical: DNP, 3 Cone: 7.15, 20-yard shuttle: 4.23, Bench Reps 28

I encourage you to take a look at Pro Football Focus's analysis of Josh Allen's 2018 season at Kentucky.  His pro football focus grade and analysis of how his game translates into the NFL shows how he will impact the defensive unit in many different facets of the game and how his game will be fluid in many different packages and systems.  His game film combined with his combine measurables certainly passes the eye test of what a top-five talent looks like. Through his film, we are able to see the many different ways that Allen impacts the game in pass rushing, coverage, tackling, reading plays, and football I.Q.

In my mind, Josh Allen is one of the select prospects in this draft that is worth using first round capital to acquire.  He is the entire package of size, speed, intelligence, and athleticism who possesses all of the tools, measurables, and experience to be a perennial all-pro caliber NFL talent.  If you cannot be sold on a prospect that possesses literally every quality of a defensive superstar who excelled in arguably the best conference in college football (17.0 sacks, 21.5 tackles for loss, 56 solo tackles, 5 forced fumbles, 4 passes defensed) then you will be skeptical of every prospect that the Packers bring in.  You can rest easy by investing in Josh Allen.       

 

-------------------

David Michalski is a staff writer for Cheesehead TV. He can be found on Twitter @kilbas27dave 

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 8 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (142) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

EdsLaces's picture

Sold.

David Michalski's picture

Thanks for the read, I definitely encourage you to take a look at the Pro Football Focus tape if you haven't already. It's a great supplemental piece that supports my argument. Go Pack Go

NitschkeFan's picture

Nice article David and in the film clip I particularly like the play where he diagnosed the screen pass and blows it up.

As for the trade, a bold move to be sure but after handing out huge cap dollars to the Smith's I would prefer to try and plug some of the other positional roster holes.

That kind of move might push our defensive front 7 into elite territory. I don't think I could get used to watching the Packers with a top 10 defense but a bottom 10 offense (just too familiar with the other way around).

Swisch's picture

Bold, perhaps Gutesy, move.
If Josh Allen has a strong potential to be a superstar, the next Khalil Mack, then trading, in effect, a #30 pick for him (the #12 pick is a wash) seems like a great move.
I like David, and any others, making a decisive choice and an enthusiastic case for a certain player.
We still have plenty of picks, including four more in the first four rounds, to add offensive line and tight end and safety.
At present, we do have a good opportunity to get a star at #12, and a near-star at #30, but I'm in favor of risking both picks on getting a superstar.

dblbogey's picture

Very good article. Thanks David.

dobber's picture

My favorite player in this year's class, bar none.

The TKstinator's picture

I thought that was William Floyd.

Bearmeat's picture

Mine too, and pre-Smith-binge by Gute, I would absolutely have agreed on moving up into the top 5 to get Allen. Now though? I think I'd rather let the draft fall to us. There are a lot of front 7 talents which are going to be there at 12.

Cubbygold's picture

Good stuff. Thanks for putting this together

Dzehren's picture

Ross Uglem posted an article yesterday that has Burns higher on his Packers draft board.

David Michalski's picture

I definitely love Ross’s film work and always respect his opinions, however different points of view make covering the draft so much fun.

Dzehren's picture

David- I think most would agree that Allen is a better prospect then Burns. Both players would look great in green and gold.

The TKstinator's picture

Oh man, both Smiths AND Allen and Burns! WooHoo!

Nick Perry's picture

Nice job David... You make a good case and at least got me thinking about it but in the end I lean towards NO.

For some reason moving from 12th to 4th assuming he's still there feels like it would cost more than the 30th pick. But even if it doesn't I still feel because of the depth in this draft I feel the Packers could make themselves stronger as a team by staying put. As a matter of fact I'm beginning to hope the Redskins want to move up to 12 from 15 to get in front of the Dolphins. Hell the Dolphins might try to move up to 12 to make sure the Redskins don't. If that was to happen and the cost is getting the Fins or Skins 3rd round pick, that gives GB the 15th, 30th, 44th, 75th, plus the 76th or 78th depending on who they traded back with. 5 picks in the first 76 or 78 picks? YES PLEASE!

Maybe I'm putting way to much hope into this draft BUT I have a very strong feeling THIS will be the draft which sets up the Packers SB hopes for the remainder of Rodgers contract. I want as many swings as I can have in the first 75 picks.

David Michalski's picture

If Allen is off the board, I absolutely go from 12 to 15 and accumulate some picks like you suggest. At 15 I'd be all in on Hock, but I'll save my analysis on Hock for another time.

In terms of what it would cost to move up to 4, it would only cost the 12th and 30th picks. That's from the NFL Draft value chart (Draftek.com), each pick has a certain point value. That's why I make the argument to draft Allen at 4 if the Jets take Quinnen Williams at 3. It's a pretty simple swap of picks if you were to make a trade.

stockholder's picture

Allen would be perfect to move around like CM3. So I have a new trade @12 and next years #1. for #4.

Nick Perry's picture

Hmmm … That's and interesting thought. We possibly give up a better first than 30th but who knows. The biggest downside to it is the amount of money we've just spent on the Edge just so we didn't have to do something like this though.

stockholder's picture

We did. CM3 played ILB. Allen can play all LB positions. Great player can do great things anywhere.

PatrickGB's picture

Stockholder, you read my mind. We might even be lower in next years draft order if we did that. Allen immediately improves and varies the rush from the middle as well as being an unexpected pass rusher from the A gap.

Coach JV's picture

It's cheaper to give up both of this years picks than to mortgage the future. If we don't reach a championship game next year, then we will have paid more than the #30...

I'm all for giving both of this year's picks to move up. This type of talent is rare.

stockholder's picture

Coach - The Packers traded #14 for #27 and a Fifth. And that #30 pick this year.(Gamble) For 13 slots. The Packers have #12. And No one knows next year. To go up 8? It's fair considering what NO gave us.

Coach JV's picture

Yeah... that's fair. either way is worth it for this kind of talent.

jannes bjornson's picture

The #12, 2020 #1 and 2020#3 would maybe entice the 49rs or Jets to dish their pick? Its kind of a Mack deal w/out a player's pro history to look at for comparison. It would be tempting.

stockholder's picture

I don't think they have to do a #3. Based on league strength. 8-8 gives you a #20 pick. I believe we can do 8-8 easy with the FAs signed.

Rossonero's picture

I personally think trading with the Giants down to 17 is a very real possibility -- assuming the Giants do not take a QB with their top 10 pick.

Why? If the Giants want a QB, there's a good chance Dwayne Haskins or Drew Lock is sitting there at #12, and they know the Dolphins (#13) and the Redskins (#15) are QB needy teams licking their chops.

In my mock, I have us doing just that -- trading down to 17 and trading away one of our 4th rounders for the Giants' 2nd rd pick (since it's a pretty high 2nd rd pick, the price is steeper).

Thoughts?

Swisch's picture

As time moves on, it seems more and more that by #15 a lot of the favorites of fans here at Cheesehead TV will be gone, such as Hock, Bush, White and Oliver.
It seems almost every time I read someone's favorite pick at #12, I see something that predicts that player will be gone by then.
As memory serves, Ross' recent listing of top draft talent backs this up. Then again, that didn't factor in any QBs or RBs being taken in the top eleven.

The TKstinator's picture

I am either hoping for or expecting some QB’s as well as some other unexpected guys to go before pick #12, thus sweetening the pot for GB.
EJ Manuel, anyone?
Christian Ponder?
C’mon, desperate GM’s, roll up those sleeves and REACH!

GLM's picture

Although I like Josh Allen a lot as a player and a prospect, I don't agree with moving up with both 1st-round picks. There's some glaring needs that need to be filled, and quite frankly, edge is no longer one of them.

The whole purpose of signing the Smiths was to take the pressure off of the draft board, and force a pick at edge rusher. I would be really surprised if that happens. If it does, I'm ok with it, because we'll know it was our gm, and not a draft pundit (no offense intended) who made the pick. I just don't see that happening.

stockholder's picture

Why ? - We can still get a lot of great players. @12 and 2020 #1 pick for Josh Allen., #30 and #75 for #17 Wilkins DT, #44 Simmons DT, #115 Zedrick Woods S MIS #119 Justin Hollins OLB O #151 David Long ILB Virginia #186 Alex Bars T ND @196 Bryce Love RB #228 Mike Weber RB

Nick Perry's picture

No Offense huh? Not until a tackle at 186? No TE, no WR. No offense but No thanks.

stockholder's picture

The trades were for defense. And to show good defense can fit the packers later. Want offense stay put. I would not draft for 1 OL in the first rd.now. Just being Honest. I would take Fant TE over Hoek or OL. (This depends on Bush.) But I still feel Oliver @12, is the pick that should be made.

Old School's picture

stockholder.....are you aware that the best TEs in the league over the last decade or so were not drafted in the first round, and that you'd probably be better off getting one on Day Two?

The TKstinator's picture

I don’t think history PRESCRIBES, I think it DESCRIBES. Such as:
Did you know if you draft a 6-3 corner out of Stanford in round five, he’s likely to go to several Pro Bowls? (Richard Sherman)
OR
If you pick a Michigan QB in round six, he’ll likely win numerous SB’s and be heavily considered in the debate for GOAT?
(Name withheld)

However, I DO agree that because of the adjustments required at the position, it’s reasonable to think that a tight end taken in ANY round will take a year or two of experience before he is consistently productive.

Old School's picture

I'm with you on this, Nick Perry. You can throw around clichés like "Defense Wins Championships" but the four teams in the conference finals....NE, NO, KC, and Rams....were the top four offenses in the league last year. We would have needed to score another 60 points last year....about 4/game...to be in that group.

IMO, we have starters at every position on offense, and we have some decent backups, but not on the offensive line or at QB. We need a starting ready OT, a TE (if we're going to feature double TE sets), a 3rd RB to help with the load, and a better backup QB.

On defense, we do not have a starter at safety opposite of Amos unless you want to count Josh Jones. We don't have a starter at ILB opposite Blake Martinez, unless you want to count Burks.

So that's six positions that have priority right now, IMO, over another guy on the edge, where we already have two starters and two backups and are coming off a season that saw us #8 in sacks. I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think people tend to overvalue edge rushers, and trading up for another one would be a clear example of that.

Nick Perry's picture

Stockholder is of the belief the #12 overall pick is to high for a TE. Matter of fact I think a majority do, hell normally I would too.

But in THIS offense, an offense that wants to run the ball and 11 personnel won't be used nearly as much as it has the last several years under McCarthy I don't think it's a reach, not for Hockenson and not for Fant. Several are ranking Hockenson as a top 10 prospect overall. One from NFL.com has him as the 5th overall prospect. No matter what it's not a horrible pick.

BUT I can also get behind Ed Oliver if he's there at #12 still especially since Daniels probably won't be back. I could also get behind Burns or Sweat and could completely understand the pick.

stockholder's picture

I get the fact you guys think we need a TE. {But not @12. correct} I can't get behind a Te to block. I think your FAs have that covered. I can get behind Fant. Is Fant Finley? We didn't draft him in the first rd. The point being; you don't have to take Hoek or Fant, when this draft is so loaded with Finleys. You don't need a TE that High. Sure they might be the BPA. But you can't run, " if you can't stop the run!" Because while Hoek and Fant are learning. Daniels, Wilkersons, and Ryans position will not stop anybody. The opponent will control the clock.

The TKstinator's picture

Another factor in the tight end at twelve (or wherever) is GB’s opinion on each guy. Do they LOVE Hock or Fant? Do they think one is overrated? Is there a lesser known guy they like just as much they think they can get later?
Where do they stand on the value of the tight end position overall?
What do they think of the tight ends already on the roster?
This would be so much easier if they’d just come out and tell us.
I’m guessing they won’t, however.

GLM's picture

I like your optimism, SH. I do feel your board is too light on offense, but that's just my take on it.

If Mike Weber lasts until 228, I will be amazed. He's much more valuable than that, IMO. I would actually like to see him drafted by the Pack. Talk about a dynamic backfield...I don't know where you take him, though...definitely 4th round, if he's there.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

I tend to think they will not make a move up like this. I do not think Pettines defense is soley reliant on having a dominant edge rusher the way Capers was. I think Pettine is more interested in generating interior pressure and having edges who can contain both the run game and escaping QBs.

That a said I am a fan of Pettine's approach. How many times did we see guys like Wilson and Kaepernick feast on Capers by just running for a 1st down when the edge broke down?

The Smith boys are both dominant edge setters. I think Gutie will continue to add DL and Edge players who are strong at contian.

The TKstinator's picture

Gutie Gutie gumdrops, says I!

Nick Perry's picture

"I do not think Pettines defense is soley reliant on having a dominant edge rusher the way Capers was. "

Excellent point. The defense actually played pretty well earlier in the year before the usual number of injuries hit again. 40 sacks, plus they moved up in many of the rankings for the year in their first season.

Preston Smith is especially good on the edge in the run game and like I'm learning more and more Z Smith can be used all over the D-Line or edge. This defense is going to be a lot of fun to watch this year just as it is already.

jannes bjornson's picture

Interior rush push the pocket. If teams counter with big guards their perimeter running becomes slower as they go inside zone runs. Big ,fast ILB
wants to join this defense and another DT.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

I also think Pettine wants LB that are more of the swarmer type than the thumper type. He's basically said so, he likes slightly smaller faster Inside linebackers. The OL is never going to be able to catch all of them. I'm hoping Burkes makes a jump this off-season.

Nick Perry's picture

You read my mind Jeremy... Having Burks make that jump would be huge for the defense. I think a jump happens and Gutekunst has the ILB he traded up for.

sherrmann1806's picture

If Pettines is truly interested in generating interior pass rush then you couldn't do better then an interior pass rusher such as Christian wilkins!! Please Pettines....find a way to draft this guy at all costs as part of your draft class!!
If i were the packers........i would use the first 4 picks including trading up or down...to address the defense!! I firmly believe that is they draft right, using the fabulous high impact talent in the draft class...that they can transform their Defense into a top ten or top 5 defense for years to come!!

4thand1's picture

It makes sense David. Giving up 12 & 30 to get a pure difference maker works for me. Plus, they were all in for Mack giving up picks along with a huge price tag. Allen wouldn't break the bank and all we lose is the 30th pick? This is where the NO trade last year works in every way. Gute has put this team in really good position to make deals that benefit the Packers.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Good player but IMO not worthy of #12 and #30 with all the player needs the Pack have. If the Pack needed just that one super splash player...for sure!

The Pack could select a top notch QB, an edge rusher, DL, ILB, TE, WR, or OT with those two selections where either or both could be quality starters. Additionally one of those selections could allow team to move back a few positions to pick up a 3rd player.

Nope if it was up to me I would likely stay put and draft BPA.

Old School's picture

The Saints thought Marcus Davenport was worth two #1 picks last year. Four and a half sacks.

Minniman's picture

In fairness I don't think that Marcus Davenport's NFL story has been written yet, but yes he came at a steep price.

Re Josh Allen, I'm not convinced he's the second coming of Lawrence Taylor (yet) and unfortunately the Packers don't have the positional depth capital to absorb a whiff here.

For me it's "all the way with BPA..." this year.

David Michalski's picture

Josh Allen is clearly a better prospect than Davenport was. Davenport was more raw, Allen is more polished coming out. I understand your point but don’t really think it’s a fair comparison.

jannes bjornson's picture

Allen is stronger and faster.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

RAS has Allen and Burns rated same score. Why wouldn't you just stay put and take Burns, Oliver or possibly Gary, or OT? Then at 30 take Fant, Simmons, Bush, or OT?

Pack has too many needs and there are going to be very good players available at 12 and 30.

Qoojo's picture

Every pick in the draft is a dice roll. In theory, the higher the pick, the better your odds. So you want as many rolls as high as possible. It would be foolish to trade #12 and #30 for #5, because there's no such thing as "can't miss" prospects in the draft.

lowcsp's picture

Oh yes there is, tony mandarich was a cant miss that went well and we didnt even have to trade up for him

Skip greenBayless's picture

I think he was going where you were going but just didn't say it. I also had the same thought as you both when I first read the article. I think many now older folks do. That is the one draft that will burn in the Packers hell of a fame forever. 4 out of 5 of those first picks were hall of famers and the Packers were the one team that got the lemon.

Dash

Qoojo's picture

Tony "The Turnstile" Mandrich. Yea, that draft still burns lol

Ferrari Driver's picture

Dash, Had we not beaten the Cardinals that last game we would have had Aikman and the Cowboys would likely have been stuck with Tony the Tiger. I went to the Packers camp to watch a few of the practice sessions and on my first visit, I saw Mandarich and he looked slow and clumsy and thought it was a camp body. Sorry to say, he played the way he looked.

mrtundra's picture

...and we picked Mandarich over Barry Sanders.

The TKstinator's picture

And Deion Sanders.

sonomaca's picture

You’d do it for Allen but not Bosa?

albert999's picture

I believe Bosa is overrated and if not there’s probably no way to get to #2 where he looks like he’s going to be picked?

jannes bjornson's picture

The mock-heads believe Bosa to San Fran is set in stone. Why? ALLen may be their guy. Bosa still has the core injury history. Gruden could make a move on the #two if he felt Allen replaces Mack.

David Michalski's picture

The cost for Bosa at 2 would cost the Packers a draft value of 2600 (Draftek.com). So that would cost either 12, 30, 44, 75, 114, and 118 or 12, 30, and next year's first rounder. Drafting Allen at 4 would only carry a draft value of 1800 which costs 12 (1,200 pts.) and 30 (620 pts.). So trading for Allen would be more realistic and provide more value given the fact that Gutekunst traded down last year to accumulate the extra 1. With this in mind you could still stand pat with the rest of the draft, or trade up using some of the extra draft picks in the fourth and sixth rounds should more value present itself in rounds 2,3, and 4.

sonomaca's picture

You’d only consider it if he fell to #5. You’d have to have 2 QB’s, Jawan Taylor, and Allen go in top 4.

albert999's picture

TJ WATT would have been nice

mrtundra's picture

What would it cost the Packers to draft Brian Burns or Clellin Ferrell? Nothing, because they will both be available at #12 and we'd still get to keep our #30 pick.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

100% agree!

Rdrake's picture

Have somebody proof read before you post, with the NFL is just over a month away?
There was more content on you defending your opinion against replies from fans than there was on why the Pack should trade up.

David Michalski's picture

Thanks for the read, apologies for the typo. It was more defending against the notion that the Packers should never trade up. Yes, some of the replies were from previous conversations in the spirit of friendly debate. However, I along with other viewers believe that a solid case for trading up was made between stats, fit in the Packers system, and strategy with how the Packers choose to deploy their draft capital.

I would also encourage you to take a look at pro football focus's analysis on Josh Allen that I posted. It definitely strengthens the case to trade up using picks 12 and 30.

Old School's picture

Perhaps, David, you should look at past history where teams spent two #1 picks to get a guy. I think you might change your mind.

David Michalski's picture

I’m all about making a bold move if I believe in a player. I believe in Josh Allen, and I think the Packers should make that bold move if the circumstances fall into place on draft night. Why not write your own “history” instead of letting it hold you back from getting a player who can transform your defense?

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Don't you post Vegas odds and like to gamble?

Skip greenBayless's picture

Very good persuasive case David. I'm still gun shy about it. I think it's PTSD carry over from 1989 yet. I'd hate to go that high again and not have it work out. I still have flashbacks. Very good work though. It does make you think the Packers could do it if they believe in him as you do.

Dash

jannes bjornson's picture

Don't they test for steroids now?

egbertsouse's picture

Even without a test one would think that the Packers would have had a clue when he went from 260 to 320 in one year and was bald by age 20.

Skip greenBayless's picture

I actually remember the last 1988 game cheering for the Cardinals at Phoenix. I think Ronny Pitts returns a punt or int back for a td and wins the damn game. Another case LIKE LAST SEASON where I was rooting for them to lose to move up to the top. I wanted Troy Aikman but because they won a meaningless game we were knocked out of the obvious choice in Aikman and had to go with a very angry running back who's Dad decided where he goes in Barry Sanders, another guy named Prime Time who you just knew would not fit in Green Bay at that time and a guy who said he would take up wrestling or boxing if the Packers drafted him. lol. Nobody after Aikman said they wanted to come here. They must have thought Tony would be the easiest to sign. 1988, man what a horrible time that was to be a Packer fan. Ironically 1989 turned out to be my all time favorite season. Even to this day it stands out more than any other.

Dash

Swisch's picture

1989 was a blast!
Along with the dramatic Majik to Sharpe game-winner against Ditka and the Bears, the Packers also beat the eventual Super Bowl champs in the 49ers.
Sad to say, a record of 10-6 wasn't good enough for the playoffs that season; but still, a fondly memorable season in the midst of many miserable ones.
Funny thing, Barry Sanders seems to have had lots of bad games as a visitor in Green Bay, including the playoffs. Maybe he was right.

BoCallahan's picture

Cardiac Kid or Don “Magic Man” Majkowski was fun to watch that year. What a game against the Bears! Mike Ditka, the Bears coach, had the game recorded in the Bears records with an asterisk. The asterisk indicated that a call was reversed by the booth on a TD pass and the win was awarded to the Packers, but later the NFL stated that it should never have been reversed. BUT, it was too late. The game was over and the Packers won!
The Lambeau crowd exploded with the touch down. Booed the flag. Went silent for 4 minutes as it was reviewed. And exploded again with the reversal. What an emotional roller coaster. It was great!
Majkowski led the league in passing and finished 2nd behind Montana for the league MVP.

Archie's picture

And it was Tony Mandarich that allowed the penetration that resulted in Majik man's torn rotator cuff and the effective end of his career.

BoCallahan's picture

Swisch,
Do you remember the game in GB (play off) where the Pack held Sanders to -1 yard rushing? He had over 1800 yards that year, and he got steam rolled that day. I had the joy of being at that game. It was COLD but no one cared. We were all stoked by the defense. The crowd was nuts. Me and my buddy were bare chested and hoarse.

GLM's picture

That was the '95 playoff game...I was there!

Swisch's picture

Bo, I didn't remember that game specifically, but it seems that Sanders had two or three playoff games in Green Bay in which he was stuffed.
I'm glad you and GLM had the fun of being there for at least one of them.
The playoff game against Detroit that I really remember was maybe a year earlier in a dome -- when Teague made a key interception at the goal line; and later, in the waning moments, and the Pack about to lose, Favre rolled left and amazingly found Sharpe right for a long touchdown pass and a thrilling victory.

Skip greenBayless's picture

Yep Swish, to me it was my very first time from childhood all the way up to adulthood that I experienced what it was like to see double digit wins. We didn't even make the playoffs that season as you said. I think the kids that grew up in the 70's and 80's will one day be known as the greatest generation of fans in Packer history. The younger people of today will never understand the pain and mental suffering this generation of people went thru. To constantly hear about "The Glory Years" but never actually have a recollection of them. We wanted our own team to worship but it simply never happened until 1996. We hung in there and never quit the faith. Today in this fast pace win now era, it could never happen. It's why I like Cleveland fans. They deserve what we experienced in 1996. They suffered long enough.

Dash

Ferrari Driver's picture

Dash, Do you mean like hoping for a miracle after the Packers drafted Barty Smith or Barry Smith?

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

What about Lions fans the past what 20 years or close?

Swisch's picture

Dash, I did get to enjoy the 1972 team, at age 10, that won its division at 10-4. Dave Robinson and Ken Bowman were a couple of holdovers from the Lombardi Era.
After that it was indeed rough for the most part, especially after our family moved to the suburbs of Chicago in 1973.
In the mid-1980s, the Packers were not only losers, but not all that likable. It was a low point, a miserable malaise, with little reason for hope.
So, yes, the fans like us who missed the Lombardi years but stayed true did indeed earn some stripes for loyalty when the team suffered so many dismal defeats.
Also, we may agree that the McCarthy Era with four championship games; one Super Bowl triumph; and something like eight straight trips to the playoffs, deserves to be remembered for the most part fondly and appreciatively.
Other than the Patriots, the Packers were consistently the green-and-gold standard of the NFL for the bulk of McCarthy's tenure. Almost all good things come to an end.
In general, the last 25 seasons have been a great ride for us as Packers fans. We do well to be grateful for such a long stretch of success, even as we try to turn around a two-season slump.
I'm excited about the new regime, and hopeful for the playoffs next season, and a Super Bowl victory soon thereafter. After two steps back, it's time for several steps forward.
For those of us who suffered so much so long ago -- not for two seasons, but over some two decades -- the successes are all the sweeter.

albert999's picture

A lot of info
WOW

albert999's picture

TJ WATT Riproar?

Packer Fan's picture

Don't do it. Drafting players is imprecise. I would rather get as many picks as possible and get 6 picks in the first three rounds rather than taking a risk and losing out. The Pack need more talent. Numbers help that more than just one player.

fthisJack's picture

yup....trade down, get your guy and get another 3rd round pick or better. then you have more ammo to make a trade up into the second if there is a guy you love. Unless Oliver or White are there at 12....trade back. i would take a TE with the trade back and then OL at 30....Risner or Lindstrom.

albert999's picture

i’d rather trade down and get meat and potatoes players than a overrated could be injured gamble trading up
BUT then again ya just might find a pro bowler?

albert999's picture

u got nothing Rip?

LambeauPlain's picture

If, and a big if, trading both ones to the Raiders would net Allen...do it.

The new front 7 would have potential to be game changing and giving Aaron and the O more plays after 3 and outs.

I suspect the Raiders will take him though. They now need him more than the Pack does. Gutey’s board is now “Into the Big Wide Open”.

Another interesting strategy would be to trade the #12 with the Titans for their second rounder and get their #16. Then immediately trade both 2nd rounders to the Steelers for their #17.

Steelers might be willing needing reloads at RB and WR.

The Pack having 3 first rounders with potential starting potential on 5 year contracts could reset the team for the duration of Aarons tenure.

First round #’s 16, 17, 30....pinch me!!

ShooterMcGee's picture

Titans are at #19 and Steelers have the 20th pick in the 1st round.

LambeauPlain's picture

Yes, you are correct...19, 20, and 30 in the first with 5 year contracts.

I would still take that.

Would you?

SportsBot_5000's picture

Dude isn’t worth trading any picks for. He had one year of solid production at Kentucky. If we stay at 12 we could get Burns/Oliver/Trade Back and at 30 we could get a S/WR/OL. I rather have Burns and a staring safety than Josh Allen.

mrtundra's picture

Burns will most likely fall to us at #12. Oliver may also fall to #12. I've seen mocks where Ferrell fell to #30. There should be solid Edge help available for Gute at either of our 1st Round picks. No need, IMO, to trade up for Allen.

BoCallahan's picture

What a spot to be in! We have the numbers to obtain a higher pick. We can slide down a couple spots and accumulate an additional pick. Or, we can stay right where we are at in the 1st round and come out in great shape. Those FA signings created a lot of freedom.

MikeS's picture

Like Dash, I too remember the Mandrich fiasco. I say stay put at 12 and 30.

Jonathan Spader's picture

You also stay put at 1989 it's 2019.

4thand1's picture

Mandrich was 30 years ago. We could have had Barry Sanders, he won 1 playoff game with Detroit. The Pack were the winningest team of the 90's with 2 SB appearances winning it all. Taking Mandrich got Infante fired and brought in Wolfe and Holmgren, worked out pretty dam good.

Skip greenBayless's picture

4th and 1, this is one of those rare cases where you said something that can apply to both sides of the argument.

Are you saying we should take Allen, hope it fails, it gets Gutey, LaFleur, Murphy fired so we can win another super bowl down the road due to stupidity? Is this what you are saying? or something else?

Dash

BoCallahan's picture

From what I recall, Barry said he wouldn’t sign with a team in the north unless it had a dome. He threatened to sit out. Rather than go through the trouble, the Packers picked the “can’t miss” player - Ante Josip “Tony” Mandarich. TM was considered to be the greatest offensive line prospect ever.

gary g's picture

Excellent prospective.

egbertsouse's picture

If Allen is the next Lawrence Taylor they should trade up. If he is the next Vernon Gholston, don’t. See, easy-peasey. This GM business is a breeze!

albert999's picture

#12 OL
#30 DK Metcalf
#44 athletic freak on defense

mrtundra's picture

The guy I want if we picked OL at #12 is Jawaan Taylor. I think he will be gone but Jonah Williams may still be there. At #30, Metcalf would be interesting, too! At #44, I'd grab one of the top Safeties. Who knows what Gute is thinking, especially after grabbing two Edge guys in FA. Will he draft another Edge guy in the top 3 rounds? Really hard to say.

GLM's picture

I agree. He's the one non-QB offensive player I would consider at #12.

albert999's picture

y’all got nothing on this ?

stockholder's picture

Reggie Bush?, Or how about all the picks for Ricky Williams. It just doesn't work most of the time. Allen maybe a great player. But he's not a franchise QB. And really shouldn't TT have traded the 2006 pick? Looking Back is easy. So As much as Gute could trade for Allen. I doubt it happens.

albert999's picture

Never gonna happen

crayzpackfan's picture

This offseason is unprecedented in recent GB history. It renders this years draft as an open crapshoot. There are many scenarios that would make sense and many of them show to be quite exciting. Do we continue to build an amazing defense for 2019 and on? Do we rest on the FA signings and load Rodgers up for his last stand? Do we trade for or draft Rodgers successor? There are so many possibilities. Do we trade up and put all our eggs in one basket for a chance to hit it big on a “chance” at a once in a lifetime player? Do we trade down in hopes of building depth and maybe finding gold later in the draft? Perhaps we stand pat, keep our current picks and simply take BPA’s? Being a Packer fan has never been so much fun in recent years. Reading everyone’s ideas and philosophies here have been so much fun. Some of us will be right, and some of us will be wrong. But one thing is for sure, us wonderful Packer fans have been waiting for many years for excitement, change, opinions, discussion, and a meaningful offseason where everyone’s speculation and dreams are f’n fun to read.

Jaylee's picture

Yeah no. I'd take 2 early career Clay Matthews over 1 Jadeveon Clowney.

The chance that Allen is a blue chip player is vanishingly small, not supported by tape or by his stats. If he was a Khalil Mack or JJ Watt, I would agree with you, but the chances of that are infinitesimal.

Keep the picks. Get a BJ Raji and a Clay Matthews.

bigspiker's picture

I watched 2 games Kentucky played this year. This kid DOMINATED. I turned to my niece and told her I wanted this kid in a Packer uniform next year. If we want to beat Chicago, we need to match them in personnel
Allen has Mack like potential we can afford for at least 5 years
Pull the trigger!!!

porupack's picture

What did your niece advise?

The TKstinator's picture

And is your niece named Brian Gutekunst?

tm_inter's picture

Just want to be on record that I'm against trading the 12th and 30th picks for Josh Allen. We can get two good starters with the 12th and 30th picks. Draft picks are never sure things - a lot of high draft picks turned out busts.

stockholder's picture

Two good starters with the 12th and 30th picks? That's really the debate. Most are stuck on #30. Some say TE @12. then #30. But they won't start! Graham starts. Wrs.? Again they won't start. If the packers don't get 2 starters. They won't make .500. They then will have holes again on the DL next year too. Wilkerson must be replaced this year. The two players that can replace Wilkerson are Oliver and Wilkens. Next Ryan must be replaced. Why is Burks the answer? He's small. If he bulked up to 240 how slow would he get? If we draft for depth, it's a waste of draft picks. I believe you take the best DL available to start. You just kill two birds with one stone. The ILB is going to be rotation, if they don't get White or Bush. Some want Jones, and others say Burks. The draft has many players who can play ILB.

The TKstinator's picture

I hope you know that this will go down on your permanent record.
But don’t be so distressed.
Did I happen to mention that...

The TKstinator's picture

Crickets?
Anybody?
Anybody?

Bueller??

porupack's picture

You make a great case David, and you almost won me over. But, I'm staying with the crowd that; 2 high prospects is better than 1 very high prospect, since it still comes down to probabilities.

If there were fewer weak areas on the roster, and the staff believed they were truely one difference maker away from the elite 4, then....maaaaaaybe.

Otherwise, I would believe GB is better with BBurns and any DL, than with one JAllen.

How about trade 2020 #1 plus 2019 4th rounder if Simmons is there in 2nd round? Now you have your top 5 difference maker, available for next year costing only this year's 4th rounder. We pay forward next year's first rounder (at bottom of the round) for a top 5 prospect at a discount. Seems better deal than what you proposed.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Very good!

Spock's picture

NEVER fall in love with a player. Whether that's this guy or the TE's or whatever. Even the HOF Ron Wolf admitted he messed up one draft by doing that. There is no "Can't Miss" EVER in a draft. I like that Gute has set the Packers up with his FA additions to take BPA. I expect that to happen. I'm excited about the draft. This trade speculation is interesting, but my expectation is that if we do any trading it will likely be trade down first and possibly trade back up later, but more likely just stand pat. This year we have the chance to get difference makers by (gasp) just staying put! Go, Pack, Go!!!!

lowcsp's picture

Thats good logic every year you all have favorite players you want to draft last year for me it was Leighton Vander Esch this year its Chase Winovich an after reading the article about him buy Austin Gayle on the Pro Football Focus web site I think he would be a real asset but I doubt we get him unless we take him at 30

Archie's picture

The 30th pick is a bonus pick, earned last year in a trade down. It should be used any way that Gutey sees fit to maximize its juice. If Gutey really thinks Josh Allen is the 2nd coming in terms of OLB, as many do, myself included, then why not? Pettine will fine a way in his scheme to fully utilize 2 stud OLB and one super-stud all purpose OLB. By the time JA comes up for a new contract we should have a SB champ and the 4 year contracts on the two Smiths will have run their course.

Bottom-line, there are many great ways Gutey could go in this draft and this is one. Staying pat and selecting either 3 defensive players in the first 44 picks or 3 offensive players or some combination of the two are other ways. I can't argue against any one strategy given the current position of the team. All that is important is that we get great value with the draft capital that we have. It could happen in many ways.

Renllaw's picture

If we trade up, I would rather do it for Ed Oliver. Elite pass rush up the middle and a ready replacement for Daniels when we let him walk next year.

GLM's picture

That's a very real possibilty. I think we all hope Daniels has a career year, and cashes in. In that case, he will probably move on. The team should be looking at that, which makes Oliver a likely candidate, if he's there at #12. Maybe the team moves up a spot, or two to take him. I could see that happening. I don't see them moving up into the top 5, though, for Allen, or anyone else, really.

lowcsp's picture

The trouble in trading up would be the final price, the 1800 points on the trade chart is just a starting point. I know if I am Mayock an gruden and were on the clock an theirs 3 blue chip players there especially with all the picks we have, the price to move off of 4 is a lot higher than the 1800 points then the question is is one player in this draft worth that gamble

Don Guske's picture

If we had say the 16th and the 30th and could trade the 16th and a 2nd round pick for the 12th. We'd be happy as a lark!
GURSS WHAT we have the 12th and still have our 2nd round pick! STAY I think you will be surprised who falls to 12.

AgrippaLII's picture

I would sit pat with my draft picks and let my board dictate who I select...but I'm not Gutekunst. I think he may have the soul of a Riverboat Gambler in him and he's got lot's of chips in this draft. The only thing I'm sure of is this year's draft will be entertaining!

Lphill's picture

Yes stay with 12 and 30 , good players will fall to us , I rather get Bush or White for the middle that will complete the defense , can still get a decent edge at 30 or 44 .

Bryan Chisholm's picture

I like it. I feel like it's finally time Green Bay matches some of the true power moves made around the NFL. The Smiths were definitely a change to what we're use too, but still not a Khalil Mack, AB type move. This scenario would be just that IMO. My only argument back is the rare opportunity of picking 2x in the first round and the talent at the top of the draft is worth 2 shots in the first, especially with a pick just outside the top 10. A pick in the top 5 though is just mightily enticing. I just want to see what Gute does already lol.

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

Without researching the Packs top 5 selections two readily come to mind for me. One has already been mentioned with Mandarich. The other was AJ Hawk. In hindsight AJ was a decent player but more of a low first round or 2nd round value player. Certainly nothing near the value of a 5th selection. Both Mandarich and Hawk were not anywhere the quality players you want when drafting that high in round 1. The point being having two selections in round 1 is golden and you stay put or move back a few selections to pick up another draft choice and hopefully the player you wanted all along. Moving up and all the draft capital to get there and the possibility the cant miss player ends up being a Mandarich or a Hawk.

With NE Gronk announcing his retirement today the Fant and Hoek fans should worry a little particularly if Pack takes someone else with their first selection. Of course NE might become trading partners with the Pack offering value.

Lphill's picture

It’s not fair putting Hawk and Manderich in comparison, Hawk played in a different scheme at Ohio state and was a reliable player while with the Pack , I believe he may be the all time leader in tackles but I could be wrong .

KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

LpHill,
He is the all time tackle leader! He was a good guy and decent player. Hawk wasnt a bust like Mandarich however was disappointing for a #5
selection in round 1. Most tackles down field with minimal turn over plays, or behind line of scrimmage. My point was he definitely did not end up being what one hoped for in a top 5 pick and why the Pack should not use up so much draft capital to try moving up and picking in top 5.

Old School's picture

Hawk is going to be in the Packer HOF.

lowcsp's picture

wrong place

lowcsp's picture

delete

Old School's picture

I was intrigued enough that I did some of my own research on Josh Allen.

14 sacks this last season.....that's pretty good.

But in two games he had zero sacks...Texas A&M and Georgia. So, to confirm my suspicions, I looked up who the offensive tackle was in those games.

As I suspected, Georgia has an All-American at tackle, and A&M has a guy predicted to go in the 2nd round.

Getting sacks against some 20 year old redshirt freshman, or a guy who's going to be teaching PE in a while.....that's one thing. Beating NFL quality offensive linemen is another. And the two best offensive linemen that Allen went up against shut him out.

Draw your own conclusions.

David Michalski's picture

So Allen had 17 sacks, not 14. Yes, he had two bad games against A&M and Georgia in those losses but destroyed Penn St, and South Carolina, while having 1.5 TFL and 1 sack in the Florida game going up against Martez Ivey who some have as a top ten pick this year. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on Allen, I think his body of work coupled with how impressive his film is and how versatile of a player he is, is enough evidence to warrant him being a top 4 pick.

David Michalski's picture

Thank you all for contributing to the discussion, I enjoyed hearing all of your opinions (yes, even those of you that I disagree with). I think that Packer culture has scared off a lot of people from opening their minds to making a bold move because of players who were busts in the past. I encourage you not to forget the players who actually lived up to their top 5 Billings, there's a lot of them as well.

I think Allen definitely has a very good chance to live up to the hype and is definitely attainable via trade (under the right circumstances). He and the Smith's would give the Packers one of the nastiest young pass rushing trios in all of football. Furthermore, Allen is more than just an edge rusher and could see reps inside and patrol the middle of the field or get to the passer following Kenny Clark and Mike Daniels's penetration and rushing lanes.

The Packers could ultimately trade for Allen and still address the tight end position (Jace Sternberger) and draft a right tackle or guard in the third round.

Stay tuned Wednesday for the next player(s) that I will highlight as part of this series. Go Pack Go!

Montana's picture

I'm not much for cliches either and "defenses win championships" is one that's certainly overused. Still I wondered what the statistics were so I did some digging.

The average defensive rank for Superbowl winners is 5.63 while the average offensive rank is 6.10 from 1966 to 2014 according to NFL stats. Also of note only seven teams won the SB during these years with defenses ranked worse than 10 while nine offenses ranked worse than 10 were winners. Baltimore had the best overall defense in 2018 followed by: New England, Chicago, New Orleans, and Los Angeles.

So draw your in conclusions from these stats.....but they do show a pattern. Give up two first round draft choices and grab a potential pro bowl defensive player in Allen? It's tough to make that leap given we have other needs; TE, DB, OL, RB but I can appreciate the case in wanting to have an elite defense. I have been advocating defense since we won the SB in 2010 and we're ranked #2. It would still be hard to justify two first round picks for Allen given our other needs.....

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, Ticket King
 
 
 

Quote

"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."
"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "