30

April

2013 Draft Leaves Packers In Need

Packers WR Greg Jennings

Who will replace Greg Jennings in 2013 is one of many questions left after the draft

The Green Bay Packers added 11 new players to their offseason roster via this past weekend’s NFL draft.  Packers GM Ted Thompson, as he does every year, maneuvered around and was able to add some additional picks to the stash that he began the draft with.

Heading into the draft, the team’s biggest needs were Defensive Line, Safety, Running Back, Wide Receiver, Tight End and Offensive Line.  The team addressed the defensive line with two selections in the first five rounds.  At running back, they added two players in the first four rounds and they selected two offensive linemen in the fourth.  Any pick within the first five rounds should be expected to stick on the team’s final 53 man roster.  The key word is “should” so I cautiously say that those three areas seemingly were covered.

While some GM’s draft more for need, Thompson’s philosophy has been more about taking the best player available on his board at the time.  Two good examples are his selecting two offensive tackles within 10 draft slots of each other in round four and trading back into the fourth round to select running back Johnathan Franklin when he had already selected a top-tier running back two rounds earlier in the form of Eddie Lacy.

With that said and as has been the case in year’s past, Thompson did not address every position of need that the Packers had going into the draft.  With so many teams jockeying and moving around constantly, it would be tough for any GM’s board to fall exactly how he wants and leave draft weekend with every hole plugged up.  Three positions left with the biggest question marks are Safety, Wide Receiver and Tight End.

Safety

Mock drafts and big boards had the Packers possibly addressing this position in round one.  It was unlikely that top-rated safety prospect Kenny Vaccaro would still be available when the Packers were set to choose at #26, so the biggest possibilities were Jonathan Cyprien, Matt Elam and Eric Reid.  Reid was taken at 18th overall and was already off the board.  Thompson clearly didn’t feel that Cyprien nor Elam were what he wanted in a first round pick and he drafted defensive lineman Datone Jones instead.

Judging by the reaction of many Packers fans on Twitter, not everyone agreed with this.  But a gentle reminder here when it comes to the draft:  Ted does what Ted wants.  Last year, the Packers relied on a rotation of Charles Woodson, M.D. Jennings and Jerron McMillian to line up opposite Morgan Burnett at the other safety spot.  Woodson was released and the jury is still out on both Jennings and McMillian.

Even with that being the case, I don’t see this as a dire situation for the Packers.  It remains to be seen whether McMillian will make a jump in his progress from his rookie season, but if he can, that would put a feather in Thompson’s cap for knowing his current players and trusting in them.  Jennings could be the odd man out or simply kept for his special teams contributions so I don’t figure him to be a big part of the equation.   The team did draft cornerback Micah Hyde, who also lined up at safety during his collegiate career.  It stands to reason that he will get a look at the safety spot during training camp.

And what about Woodson?  Many have expressed their opinions on Charles and feel that he should hang up the cleats and call it a very successful career.  But he clearly wants to continue playing and in the right situation, I’m not convinced that he can’t still help the Packers.  That is, of course, if he and the team were to agree on a return and the terms made sense.  He can’t play every down and he’s not a cover back anymore, so why waste the roster spot, right?  Because he’s Charles Woodson.  I’m not saying that it’s a certainty that the team needs to bring him back, but having a future Hall of Fame defensive back at your disposal this late in the game isn’t the worst scenario I can imagine.

Wide Receiver

The team lost two big pieces of their wide receiving core after the 2012 season when Donald Driver retired and Greg Jennings departed in free agency.  The team will have a hard time replacing their leadership but they do need to replace the bodies.

For a team that has predicated itself on the success of the passing game, waiting until the seventh round to address this position only emphasized what drafting two running backs early already said:  the 2013 Green Bay Packers will run the football.  Still, I think Green Bay wants to carry five receivers.  They have Jordy Nelson, James Jones and Randall Cobb set as the 1-2-3 punch.  Jarrett Boykin is a holdover from 2012 but we need to see how well he has recovered from his late-season injury.  My assumption is that he will hold onto the fourth spot.

That leaves at least one slot open.  Does the team look to return man Jeremy Ross to fill that void or do they turn to one of their seventh round selections and hope they can crack the roster?  It’s too early to tell.  The team drafted Charles Johnson and Kevin Dorsey in the last round and as with any late round pick, there is absolutely no guarantee that one or either will stick.  Sure, one of Johnson or Dorsey may flash during camp and be the fifth guy, but I’m not betting on it at this point.  This is one position that will receive heavy attention during training camp to see who grabs that last spot or if the team decides to go with just four.

Tight End

There is one reason why I added this positon to the list:  Jermichael Finley.  Finley will be the Packers starting tight end in 2013 and barring injury, he has this position fortified.  Beyond this season, however, it’s anyone’s guess.  There are various stances on whether Finley is back after 2013.  I am of the belief that the chances are less than great.  While tight end is not a position of immediate need, without Finley, it becomes a huge hole on this team.  There is quite a disparity between Finley and the rest of the bunch in terms of being a capable receiving threat.

Andrew Quarless was the team’s #2 tight end until he suffered a severe knee injury late in 2011 that cost him the entire 2012 season.  His return is a question mark.  DJ Williams has rarely been seen and the jury is still out on him.  Ryan Taylor’s biggest contributions have come on special teams and it’s unknown how well he would thrive in a more regular role.  And then there is newly-acquired Matthew Mulligan.  Until he dons the Green & Gold and is seen in action, the team doesn’t really know what they have in him.  Hardly a clear-cut heir apparent if Finley leaves.

Again, this is not a need in 2013, but it is one that they could have opted to get after to give a potential replacement a year to develop in the offense.

 

It’s always tough so say how well a team drafted when none of the newly acquired have played a single snap.  All we have to go on right now is Thompson’s history in drafting and hope that 2013 ends up being a draft that we are still talking about 3+ years from now.

There are also likely to be many roster moves between now and the beginning of the season and the Packers may end up finding other solutions to the above-mentioned need areas.  Even with some big questions at key positions, it appears that Green Bay is in good position to continue to take steps toward another playoff run in 2013.

——————

Jason Perone is an independent sports blogger writing about the Packers on "AllGreenBayPackers.com

Follow Jason at:

Jason Perone
                Add to Circleson Google+

——————


---- Get AddToAny

66 Responses to “2013 Draft Leaves Packers In Need”

  1. dsteh says:

    Micah Hyde was listed as a free safety on the Pack’s website when picked. Today’s he’s listed as a corner.

    Quarless had a better rookie year than Finley so I wouldn’t count him out yet.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    • Stroh says:

      Quarless only got on the field as a rookie due to Finley’s injury and he was probably 2 yrs older than Finley as a rookie. Not a good comparison at all.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5

      • Dobber says:

        He did play well for a rookie, all told. A better or “more willing” blocker than Finley. If he’s able, he’d be a nice complement.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

        • Sven says:

          Yeah Quarless was a good contributor in 2010, he helped the team on the Superbowl run. I don’t really see TE as a strong need.

          I really don’t get the concern over replacing Jennings and see WR as a strong need. I think that the packers were as good without him as with him last year. Cobb, Nelson, and Jones are a strong core to the unit, and I like the idea of developing some later picks into solid receiver rather than drafting high to get one.

          I really thought that Jennings, while an excellent pass catcher and runner, did not like to block for others, and that was becoming a big part of the passing game last year.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2

        • Stroh says:

          Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8

  2. PatMc says:

    Hyde is a potential replacement for Bush on ST. He will be used as a nickel or dime CB/S hybred who will not allow any QB to run 40 yds without being hit.

    Since GB didn’t jump on a TE I’d say TT/MM feel quarless or another TE on roster is ready. At least TE is not as big an issue for 2013 versus RB.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

  3. Dan "FireMMNow" Blakley FireMMNow says:

    cannot address all the needs. the biggest need was addressed however. TT had to leave the first two rounds with atleast one impact front seven player. hopefully he got that in datone jones. a big guy with great athleticism for the position.

    i was not happy with the eddie lacy pick, mainly because i had a feeling players like franklin would still be there when the packers picked later in the draft. but it sounds like the packers got two of the top three RBs on their board. I do not feel the RB position was that big of a need, but i think TT must disagree with me.

    JC tretter is going to play center right? I saw that you stated he was an OT. I know kiper had him ranked as his #3 center.

    not a big fan of the micah hyde pick. i really hope they plan on moving him to safety, because he does not look like he has the hips to play CB.

    WR will have to be a point of emphasis next year. i doubt the packers will be able to resign jones and jordy. TT has to ensure that rodgers always has weapons. brett favre played too many years with bill schroeder and a step too slow antonio freeman.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7

    • Jason Perone Jason Perone says:

      Tretter will see time at C and OG in Green Bay. He was a tackle at Cornell which was the only reason I mentioned that. Likewise, Micah Hyde was mostly a corner in college but will likely get more looks at safety.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    • Jersey Al Jersey Al says:

      Running Back became a need because the Packers had it in their plans this offseason to finally develop a real running game. I’ve been saying this for months. MM finally had enough of the sacks – letting AR take a beating is the worst thing you can do. Since you’re not going to transform the offensive line in one year, best bet was to be able to run the ball more, exposing Rogers to less hits. And of course, this also makes his his play-action a lot more effective when other teams might actually believe the Packers are going to run the ball. So I kind of looked at it as a need from that standpoint. If they were going to keep things status quo – then you’re right and it wasn’t that big of
      a need.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

      • Dan "FireMMNow" Blakley FireMMNow says:

        100% agree with you al. if the packers are going to finally scrap much of the ZBS and make a commitment to the power running schemes that they showed some of in the later part of the season the RB position is a need. if you are going to really commit to running the football with a purpose. if they are giong to go with the same scheme up front AP would not make a real difference.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

        • Dobber says:

          I just don’t see them as being equipped to shift to a power running game. One side of the line can do some of that (Sitton, Bulaga/Barclay), but not the other.

          I think a back like Lacy who has some change of direction is able to be his own blocker to a degree and grind out a few more yards.

          My concern is that MM won’t keep with the run if he’s not seeing results early in games.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

          • Dan "FireMMNow" Blakley FireMMNow says:

            lang is probably the the packers best pulling guard. this should be a team that prefers to run to the right side with power. most teams have a side of the line with better run blocking and most of the time it is the right side.

            this team was obviously not equipped to run the ZBS either, no sense in banging your head against the wall for the 7th straight year.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

            • JimR_in_DC says:

              “this team was obviously not equipped to run the ZBS either, no sense in banging your head against the wall for the 7th straight year.”

              ^^^this

              Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

              • CSS says:

                Appropriate personnel is debatable, but it’s all moot unless the coach and quarterback show a willingness to actually commit to the run. See San Francisco game as poster-child for McCarthy/Rodgers falling in love with their own philosophy and ability to audible out of run to perceived passing match-ups that favor the offense pre-snap. Everything was flowing until the inexplicably cut it off. Lineman need a rhythm, too. QB#1 and coach #1 are implicit in the failure.

                Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

        • Stroh says:

          Packers haven’t been a trur ZBS for couple years. They use amix of schemes. Some power some zone.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2

      • Savage57 says:

        All good and valid points. One thing for certain, we are going to learn if the reason for the past problems with the run game was the backs or the linemen.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. BubbaOne says:

    Jason,”The team lost two big pieces of their wide receiving core (GJ & DD)”
    …come on…GJ missed half the games and DD had 8 receptions total for 2012; hardly 2 big pieces…more like morsels.

    “This is one position (WR) that will receive heavy attention during training camp to see who grabs that last spot.” Yup, I’ll be waiting w/ bated breath to see who wins the coveted 5th WR spot.

    Re the TE spot: You didn’t mention Brandon Bostic. He was on the PS all year as he makes the transition from WR.

    Apparently, TT and MM think pretty highly of the young safeties. They always stress that this is when they make the biggest jump. I hope Sean Richardson rebounds from his injury.
    “And what about Woodson?”
    Jason, let it go!!!

    TT rec’d high marks for his drafting. Re a Free Agency grade: he got a Mulligan…nyuk, nyuk.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 3

    • JimR_in_DC says:

      I was pretty much thinking what Bubba said while reading this, Jason. I think the additions to the D-line (including Jolly) should lead to significant improvement. The additions at RB and the O-line (including the return of our injured tackles) should add a whole new dimension to the offense. I predict A. Rodgers’ sack numbers are going to drop drastically. I’m looking for improvement from the safeties we have on the roster, and the WRs and TEs should continue to get the job done. Overall, I’m reasonable comfortable with the draft and our overall roster.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1

      • Dobber says:

        Assuming no more major injuries than a year ago, and no significant injuries at WR/TE, this team should mirror the 2012 squad…with a pretty tough schedule.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Jason Perone Jason Perone says:

      There’s a sentence after yours that is quoted above talking about Driver and Jennings’ leadership. Can’t just replace that. And when we talk about holes on a team, it’s not just about the year prior. So Jennings missed time and was hurt last year. Had he not been, he probably has another good year and puts up good numbers. He’s not washed up by any means and his departure creates a . . hole!

      You discount the attention that the WR position will get this offseason. I can tell you this, in Green Bay, the passing game rules with a QB like Aaron Rodgers. You’ll be hearing more about the WR crop before the season starts, you can bank on it, baited breath and all.

      As far as Woodson goes, until he retires, he’s an option. Plain and simple. It’s open for discussion which is what this piece is meant to start and that it has. Mission accomplished. In the end, he may not end up with the Packers or anyone for that matter. But. . he could and so it’s written.

      Good stuff!

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3

      • JimR_in_DC says:

        I can’t see having Woodson back. I think he’s done, but hasn’t admitted it to himself yet.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      • Stroh says:

        Leadership is replaced from one year to the next. Neither Jennings or Driver will be missed. Players can’t lead if they aren’t on the field.

        Woodson won’t be back. Its a dead horse let it die.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4

  5. Dobber says:

    Going into the draft, I felt that the Packers needed to come up with an impact player at TE/WR in the first two days…which was a guarantee that we wouldn’t see that happen. I can’t help but think that TT is gambling that an improved running game will take some of the pressure off the WR/TE positions.

    I would agree, but the ultimate question is whether MM will trust the running game enough to really commit to using it (which will increase the shelf life of their franchise QB), and whether the OL can support a higher percentage of running plays. At this stage, one side of the line can, but you can only run right so many times.

    Don’t forget that Lacy, Franklin and Harris can all catch the ball, too.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

    • Chad Toporski Chad Toporski says:

      “I can’t help but think that TT is gambling that an improved running game will take some of the pressure off the WR/TE positions.”

      My thoughts exactly. You don’t necessarily need an impact back AND receiver… One or the other will do with the talent they already possess.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      • JimR_in_DC says:

        I don’t see it as much of a gamble. Last year, our offense was to. one-dimensional. IMO, of course.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0

        • Dobber says:

          I agree, and the offense still sputtered at times mostly due to defenses keying on that.

          If the Packers fail to force the opposition to respect the run, it could get even leaner throwing the ball (especially if there are injuries) and lead to a pretty frustrating 2013. Therein lies the gamble.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • Chad Toporski Chad Toporski says:

          I think the real gamble is whether the running game will actually improve.

          (Which I think, and hope, that it will.)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

  6. Nopainnogain says:

    Can we stop saying we lost an impact player in Donald driver? He was “lost” a while ago due to age and didnt do much of anything since 09. jennings was out much of the year and we still have one of the best groups of receivers. The secondary, as currently constructed was one of the best in the league last year without much contribution from Woodson. I don’t have a problem putting WR & S on the backburner. We had more pressing needs.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1

    • Jason Perone Jason Perone says:

      Nope. Leadership, leadership, leadership. Read it again

      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7

      • Dan "FireMMNow" Blakley FireMMNow says:

        I agree up to a point with you jason. The packers have had a lot of young receivers develop due to having a true professional like DD on the team and later Jennings appeared to grow into that role. Now it is time for Jones and Nelson to step into that role. The packers have the best group of route runners in the league (as a total group) and you can be sure that a lot of that comes from the young guys watching and listening to proven vets. But at this point Jordy and James are the proven vets.

        I also agree that the 4th WR spot in GB is an important position. you can pretty much guarantee that one of the top 3 guys is going to miss time. That number 4 WR needs to be ready to step in as a #3. The offense changes a lot when MM does not feel comfortable using his spread formations.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

        • Savage57 says:

          James Jones will have all the young guys talking to themselves.

          Young guys’ productivity goes through the roof.

          Opposing defenses stay away from Packer WR’s thinking they are all crazy.

          Sounds like a plan.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

      • BubbaOne says:

        Once again a leader leaves and it’s oh, oh, will we have “Lord of the Flies” or “the convicts running the asylum”? At every position there’s a 5yr+ vet (DB-Tramon, LB-Hawk, DL-Pickett, WR-Jones & Nelson, TE-Finley, OL-Sitton, QB-AR, RB-Kuhn, ST-Crosby & Bush) led by a strong and veteran coaching staff w/ MM at the helm…we’ll be fine. This is why I have no worries and didn’t address the leadership aspect in my previous posting.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2

      • Stroh says:

        Leadership is replaced from one year to the next. If a player isn’t on the field he can’t lead. I’ve seen it first hand. Unless a player is on the field hes not much of s leader. Neither Jennings or driver will be missed. Jones or Nelson will lead the WR. Making far too much of it!

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3

        • Oppy says:

          Donald Driver certainly led his room every day on the practice field, regardless if he got snaps or even suited up on Sundays.

          His legacy is strong in GB’s WR’s, and while I believe that Jordy Nelson’s epic work ethic and Randall Cobb’s desire to be great will be more than enough to carry the torch, I don’t believe it is fair to write off Driver’s impact on the Packer’s young receivers because he had reduced playing time. His professionalism and the way he cultivated meaningful relationships off the field as well as on it was the strength of his leadership.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

  7. JimR_in_DC says:

    I think the team has a number of leaders, and maybe more that’ll lead now that some of the past leaders have moved on. I don’t worry about this team.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  8. Nopainnogain says:

    You called him a “big piece” too. That could mean many things. And it’s not just you im referring to if you reread my comment. I feel like writers tend to overrate the whole “leadership” thing because it gives them a better angle for a story. It’s not like the others will be lost without them. Coaches provide leadership too.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

    • Jason Perone Jason Perone says:

      Yes and in the end, coaches coach. Players play. Jennings was and is a player. It’s not an angle. Survey 10 impartial fans about what this team will miss most about Driver and Jennings

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

      • BubbaOne says:

        And the smart ones will answer, “Who?”…just like w/ Woodson, time to move on…don’t live in the past.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3

        • Jason Perone Jason Perone says:

          The “past” is 3 months ago? Well played.

          Ignore the past, you’ll make the same mistakes you made then. You’re on. . bring me 10 impartials and their responses. . and the broom stick of the wicked witch of the West “nyuck nyuck nyuck” (talk about living in the PAST!)

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4

          • BubbaOne says:

            I was being just a little flippant. I felt you were barking at the moon a little too much. The team can only deal w/ who’s on roster. As I pointed out above there’s enough leadership w/ the staff and within the locker room. If TT and MM thought it was a concern they’re smart enough they would have addressed it. Time to move forward.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

            • Jason Perone Jason Perone says:

              I get that and again, this was more to spark conversation. That, it has. I’m not pining for Woodson or implying that the sky is falling without Jennings/Driver. To me, the “who” that will fill those spots is worth discussion.

              Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

              • Turophile says:

                Leadership works in tandem with ‘doing it’ on the field. If you can no longer do it on the field or are injured, the level of that leadership diminishes.

                Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

      • Stroh says:

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6

    • Mojo says:

      Agree with Nopain and Bubba. The leadership angle is overblown in all sports. Desire(motivation) and ability(athletic talent, brains) are what’s most important. And to be honest about Woodson, his freelancing might of had a greater negative impact on the secondary in terms of leading by example. Especially when he was trailing a receiver by ten yards because he guessed wrong. Driver rarely played the last few years to provide any on the field leadership.

      If it’s the locker-room leadership, well it’s nice but overblown IMO. Anyone who’s been on the team a few years and wants to win will keep the malcontents in line and let them know what they need to do. If not, then there’s nothing a “leader” could do any way.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

      • PatMc says:

        Time for Tramon and barnett to step up as leaders. Along with Hawk and the highest paid LB in the NFL – CMIII.

        I think woodson’s freelancing was a bad example to the young guys. Time to move on.

        MM can always hire DD as a coach for the locker room if he thinks it is needed.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  9. Nopainnogain says:

    ‘Most’ is a relative term. Just because you miss some quality more than other qualities does not mean you will miss that quality significantly. Just more than the others, which says more about their eroding health and ability than it does about their ‘leadership’ when that is the only thing you can laud them for. And I still think it is an injustice to place Driver and Jennings in the same sentence at this stage, even with all Jennings’ health problems.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. Tarynfor12 Tarynfor12 says:

    As to the leadership roles being lost with Jennings and Woodson gone,all I can say,which I’ve said many a time,if your not developing leaders from your Draft and Develop Program…you’re failing.

    With each and every draft class at least one player should be getting a second contract because of him passing and succeeding the criteria of that Draft and Develop program.

    If any player NEEDS to be signed to an overpriced contract solely for LEADERSHIP value…your season is already lost as you have shown no faith in any other to fill the role.

    Driver was for many,a must keep last year for leadership which proved worthless,useless and with absolutely no positives from it.

    Many have already expressed the same sentiment with Woodson and IMO, will end with the same results.

    Jennings left for money knowing he isn’t worth the price…that in itself shows a lack or at least a placement of Leadership lower on the list of his values.

    This IMO,is a very basic point of NOT dealing in FA whether of another teams or those of your own…leadership is a word merely spoken from them but hardly ever translates to the leader needed on the field.

    In all,Jennings would miss crucial time and Woodson would be missing nearly all the time regardless if on the field or the sideline.

    A high price to pay for what is already seen as a lost battle.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

  11. Alex Parkhurst says:

    Re Driver:

    We all love the guy but I remember not that long ago that most folks were 100% sure that losing Brett Favre meant we would go into a slump of historic proportions and not win a Super Bowl for a long time and who was Aaron Rodgers anyway.

    We had a one dimensional offense last year and the other 31 teams knew it. If we can run the football:

    1) Rodgers isn’t a sitting duck
    2) Defenses have to play us honestly
    3) The loss of Jennings/Driver becomes less important

    The last two years it is our defense that was dreadful. If we fix that and can run the football we could have a great year like three years ago when we went 10 and 6 and won the whole thing.

    I don not see McCarthy not supporting the running game. It nay take a few games but he must stick with it as long as those two running backs are healthy.

    Let’s presume you are an offensive lineman who blocks well and sees 2 or 3 yards picked up. In 2013 you block well and you get 5 or 6 yards with the 2 new backs. Trust me as a blocker you will feel a whole lot different.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

  12. Jason Perone Jason Perone says:

    We can sit here and argue the semantics of what Jennings and Driver mean or don’t mean to the packers today or in the “past”. But this team won’t get by all season with just Cobb, Nelson and Jones. Not happening. There’s still questions and a need at WR

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4

    • Tarynfor12 Tarynfor12 says:

      08′
      Driver,Jennings,Jones,Nelson Martin
      09′
      Driver,Jennings,Nelson,Jones,Swain
      10′
      Driver,Jennings,Nelson,Jones,Swain
      11′
      Driver,Jennings,Nelson,Jones,Cobb
      12′
      Driver,Jennings,Nelson,Jones,Cobb,Boykin
      13′
      Nelson,Jones,Cobb..Boykin,Ross,and the draftees

      Can you honestly say that the #1,2,3 guys have really changed so much as in production and route running,you think that this year is a bad threesome going in ????? Please stop.

      Here are some WR’s not mentioned during these years..Jake Allen,Biren Ealy,Patrick Williams and not to mention those who were regarded as the next few who were cut at the start of last year and being on the PS for two.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

      • Jason Perone Jason Perone says:

        Imagine Diddy in the background saying: Can’t stop. . won’t stop. . can’t stop. . won’t stop. Snap your fingers, Taryn!

        Nelson, Cobb, Jones = not enough.

        I’m out, guys and girls. Good discussion. You all take it from here.

        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6

      • BubbaOne says:

        If a major focus less than a week after the draft is who is going to be the 4th and 5th WR’s I’m excited about the outlook for this season. Plus w/ a better run game and RB’s who can also catch and maybe another pass catching TE (Bostic) may allow less wear and tear on the WR’s.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      • Dobber says:

        Nobody said anything about Cobb, Jones, Nelson as being a “bad threesome” or their route-running or the like. What was said that one if not two of these guys are going to miss time during the regular season. Since the Packers like to play 3-wides a lot, you’re playing a lot of Boykin + receiver #5, or two TEs, if those guys overlap in their injuries. If someone blows a knee or has some other season-ending injury, it gets tough if one or more of Boykin-Ross-rookies doesn’t step up.

        I think for an SB contender (and the Packers still are), it’s risky to spread the butter on your bread so thin.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

        • Greg says:

          Every team lacks depth in some areas. It’s the reality of the salary cap era. Some areas you have to get by with what you got. The situation isn’t nearly as worrisome as yall seem to think. You could make the injury argument about pretty much every position on every team, especially if you’re talking about 2 guys going down at the same position at the same time. to have that happen and not expect to see a dropoff is unrealistic for any team. making do with fill-ins for a few games will not kill your season. every team has to go through times like that at various positions.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

        • Tarynfor12 Tarynfor12 says:

          If we lost GJ in either 08,09,10′ we would not have done what we did leaving DD and very young Nelson and JJ in 08-09′and a loss of GJ in 10′ would have kept us out of the SB with only DD and Nelson playing to a above and high level accordingly.
          If Cobb,who is our GJ now were to be lost,we are in a much better place with Nelson and JJ’s level of play then we would be as to the other senarios…especially with the #4-5 guys being looked at in comparison.

          Point is…we have more now at WR with Cobb,Nelson and Jones healthy than we ever had and that cannot be considered to be ‘not enough’ per the author.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

    • Dobber says:

      I don’t see anything happening until they know whether or not Boykin, Ross, or the rookies can play a consistent role as #4.

      Unless guys fall flat on their faces during OTAs, this means that this will go all the way into camp.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  13. Batavia Greg says:

    How sad! What started out to be a very promising draft quickly deteriorated. Two undersized OTs to play interior positions; a CB too slow to play CB who may or may not play safety; an OLB from Illinois State; an ILB from South Florida; a DT who should have been an UDFA (like most of the other late round selections); and, two project “under-the-radar” WRs.

    My guess is that a Super Bowl every 15 years or so is good enough to keep the Cheeseheads filling Lambeau. Besides, is Aaron Rodgers really that much better than Brett Favre that he deserves more Super Bowl Championship rings?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7

    • Nopainnogain says:

      What are you expecting? An ‘Eddie Lacy’ in every round? the players at the bottom of the draft aren’t supposed to be as good as the ones at the top. it’s not like good players have never come out of lesser-known colleges

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2

      • Batavia Greg says:

        It is true that some good players do come from lesser-known colleges and are selected in late rounds. For example, Nick Williams, DT, from Samford, David Bass, DT, Missouri Western, Aaron Mellette, WR, Elon, and Ty Powell, OLB, from Harding — all of whom were selected in the 7th round but by other teams. The Packers had a chance at all of them.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5

  14. Mojo says:

    Presently they are thin at WR. And this is a team that uses it’s receivers a lot. Not to jink them, but remember Jordy was injured at the end of last year. And it wasn’t just his ankle and hamstring, his knee had swollen-up again. I just don’t feel very confident about anyone other than the top three. We need either Boykins to step-up or one or two injuries to our top three and we’re sool

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

  15. Wagszilla says:

    Tight end? Tight end?!

    Did you forget that King Quarless is coming to save all the little boys and girls in Green Bay?

    Packers are fine at WR. Jordy, Jones, and Cobb is a good backfield. Sure you’d like a 4th but you have two “#1″ recievers. They just have to stay healthy.

    This offense is going to be exciting. Hopefully McCarthy called up Papa Joe P in the offseason to get some gameplan advice, though.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2

  16. aaronqb says:

    A few points:

    1. Driver is not a loss. He hasn’t contributed substantially in 2 years. Last year was a gift to him IMO because they didn’t want a PR issue
    2. Dont forget Bostik at TE. I think he stands a very good chance of making the team
    3. I think TT has a better grip on the safety situation that any of us. We can sit here and second guess the Lacy pick because in hindsight they got Franklin in the 4th. But, at the time, they didn’t know Franklin would be available.
    4. The Packers ended 2012 with 7 WRs on the roster. They lost 2. I’m confident they will have at least 5 NFL-caliber WRs on the roster. And the last 2 will only be needed if one of the big 3 gets injured. The Packers played very few 4 WR sets – even when Jennings was available.
    5. None of us knows how well the draftees will perform at this point. Let’s give it a rest before we start commenting on who can flip their hips, etc until we see these guys in action.
    6. The Packers’ chance at getting to the Super Bowl will rest almost entirely upon veteran players. I expect Jones and one of the RBs to contribute greatly, but most of the draftees will be in a developmental year.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

  17. Oppy says:

    Nelson, Cobb, Jones not enough, I can’t agree with that.

    Nelson was the most dominant WR in the game for an almost 20 game stretch at one point from 2010-2011, and last season he was riddled with nagging injuries that slowed him down.

    Cobb is a superstar waiting to happen,he has the ability to own the field.

    Jones got his head right and managed to score more TD’s than any other WR in the NFL last season.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2

  18. CornHolio says:

    I think TT came through again.
    With 2 min. left and 80 yds. to go, up by 2, you need a running game. Thunder and Lightning!
    Datone shores up the D-line.
    A couple of stud projects on O-line.
    Hyde as an enforcer at Safety.
    2 tall flashers to stretch the field (6’2″+ and 4.3/40 is/are big & fast!)
    Love the players who left, but competition breeds quality and with the bounty of picks and returning previously injured we have. Quantity has a quality all it’s own.
    Go Pack Go!!!
    (The Bears still SUCK!!!)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0