If I were running the draft, Cooper would be the only offensive player I would want at #26.

I don't think a position selection would tick me off. Slot value might, but Teddy Ballgame reaching at a slot? How can you get mad at Teddy Ballgame when the whole world thought Nick Collins was a reach?

When it comes to the draft, in Executive Vice President, General Manager and Director of Football Operations Ted Thompson I trust.

Originally Posted by: JustJeff 

QB or P. Best player available or no, you don't need to draft someone that has zero value for your team when we've got holes to fill.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 

Isn't that how we got AR?

I agree with you, but I just found it ironic when I read this.

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan 

No. Favre's successor WAS a hole to fill. Without question. He had been feigning retirement for some time prior. The fact that Rodgers dropped in our laps was a giant stroke of good luck. He was mocked to go #4 to TB by Walter.

We had defensive needs at the time in our secondary. Walter had us mocked to pick CB R1, then to pick QB Charlie Frye R2. I saw Matt Cassel as our R1 pick in a Scout mock. So, word was out, and really, it was common knowledge that we needed a QB. Fave was entering his 14th season.

Not bustin' your balls QCHuskerFan, but that is the way it was then. I think nearly everyone thought, "well, OK..." when we went Rodgers. The pick made perfect sense. Favre had seemed invincible, but everyone knew his time was running out, and getting his replacement was imperative over those next two seasons.

Funny too, that those defensive needs were addressed with Ted's R2 pick of Nick Collins. What a draft!

Originally Posted by: play2win 

We look at value differently. Aaron Rodgers contributed nothing to the team in the 3 years after he was drafted. In hindsight, was it a great pick, yes. But to me, it offered zero value at the time. And for the following 2 years. Unique situation, though.

Don't distort history. There was a tremendous amount of criticism at the time. The team had immediate needs. They had gone 10-6 the previous season and were the #3 playoff seed. They were outclassed in Rd 1 of the playoffs. I would suggest that most people felt that team's window was small, just like right now. TT's pick addressed none of the needs that would get that team farther in the playoffs. Plenty of people were pissed! Favre was at the front of the line. Instead of giving him a player of immediate use, Ted Thompson chose someone that wouldn't see the field. Packers ended 2005 at 4-12 and out of the playoffs. Aaron Rodgers offered no value to that team or the following 2 years.

If Ted Thompson picked someone this year in the first round that was not expected would see the field this year, would you see value?

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan 

We look at value differently. Aaron Rodgers contributed nothing to the team in the 3 years after he was drafted. In hindsight, was it a great pick, yes. But to me, it offered zero value at the time. And for the following 2 years. Unique situation, though.

Don't distort history. There was a tremendous amount of criticism at the time. The team had immediate needs. They had gone 10-6 the previous season and were the #3 playoff seed. They were outclassed in Rd 1 of the playoffs. I would suggest that most people felt that team's window was small, just like right now. TT's pick addressed none of the needs that would get that team farther in the playoffs. Plenty of people were pissed! Favre was at the front of the line. Instead of giving him a player of immediate use, Ted Thompson chose someone that wouldn't see the field. Packers ended 2005 at 4-12 and out of the playoffs. Aaron Rodgers offered no value to that team or the following 2 years.

If Ted Thompson picked someone this year in the first round that was not expected would see the field this year, would you see value?

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan