Actually, I do know quite well how hard it is to come away with quality starters in a single draft. That is exactly why I have been pining for years here for Thompson to employ a more balanced overall personnel procurement approach, using BOTH the draft and FA.

Did I not say it was a tall order to add that many starters in a single draft? WTF?

As a fan, was I upset about last year? Yes, but I've been upset about our last 3 years. Many of the same issues that Mike McCarthy promised at the end of each season to address reared its ugly head, again, and again, and again. Add to that, we've been deficient in real talent at S and ILB for 3 years, not to mention pass rush opposite Matthews, and Ted Thompson has not gotten the job done at these positions... as much as I like and respect him.

We left a lot on the table in 2011, 2012 and 2013. Time to clean up.

This isn't all flowers because it is a new season. Real issues need to be addressed and put to rest, namely position upgrades and team health. I guess I take a more realistic approach, and we clearly have no one at FS, no one at ILB next to Hawk, Hawk himself isn't getting any younger, and we are now quite thin on the O side at C, TE and WR. So, adding starters at at least 2 positions, S and ILB, is not out of the question if Ted does a good job drafting this year. Just what I said.

Originally Posted by: play2win 

You keep dreaming, and Ted will keep doing his due dilligence in keeping the Packers a viable threat every year.

Mark this thread if you want.

The Packers will make a deeper run in the playoff in 2014, IF NO ROOKIE HAS TO START.

Thankfully Ted and mike don't give up on players as fast as some on this forum, if that was the tuth, The packers would be fielding a team made up of mostly rookies and 2nd year guys , and that is a recipe for disaster!!!

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 

Sitting in my couch I can't stop thinking we need to draft a safety, then a safety then another safety, then a safety and in the last rounds 3 or 4 extra safeties.

In today's NFL the safety position is critical, a good pair there make the whole defense be better, they make the DL look better, they give more time to all the defense in general and they stop the big plays that make defenses look horrible.

I'm almost convinced Burnett is good as a backup. So I think we need not one but two safeties, a whole new pair in the backfield to make the defense really work.

I think it's easier for a good safety to make LBs good than for good LBs to make the safeties look fine.

Originally Posted by: luigis 

if only there were that many safeties that were good enough to be drafted that many times.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

Sitting in my couch I can't stop thinking we need to draft a safety, then a safety then another safety, then a safety and in the last rounds 3 or 4 extra safeties.

In today's NFL the safety position is critical, a good pair there make the whole defense be better, they make the DL look better, they give more time to all the defense in general and they stop the big plays that make defenses look horrible.

I'm almost convinced Burnett is good as a backup. So I think we need not one but two safeties, a whole new pair in the backfield to make the defense really work.

I think it's easier for a good safety to make LBs good than for good LBs to make the safeties look fine.

Originally Posted by: luigis 

You keep dreaming, and Ted will keep doing his due dilligence in keeping the Packers a viable threat every year.

Mark this thread if you want.

The Packers will make a deeper run in the playoff in 2014, IF NO ROOKIE HAS TO START.

Thankfully Ted and mike don't give up on players as fast as some on this forum, if that was the tuth, The packers would be fielding a team made up of mostly rookies and 2nd year guys , and that is a recipe for disaster!!!

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 

I don't buy it.

I'm of the mindset that losing Nick Collins may have cost us another title. I think he was that good. But given the choice between an elite safety and elite pass rusher, I'll take the pass rusher every time.

We're in a day and age where defensive backs aren't allowed to defend receivers down field. And we are in a time where safety really isn't that deep of a position across the league, potentially because of the rule changes.

Defense is won up front. You need to win the line of scrimmage, however that is done. You need hit the running back at the line of scrimmage or in the backfield. And you need to get to the quarterback and disrupt the offensive rhythm.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 

I don't buy it.

I'm of the mindset that losing Nick Collins may have cost us another title. I think he was that good. But given the choice between an elite safety and elite pass rusher, I'll take the pass rusher every time.

We're in a day and age where defensive backs aren't allowed to defend receivers down field. And we are in a time where safety really isn't that deep of a position across the league, potentially because of the rule changes.

Defense is won up front. You need to win the line of scrimmage, however that is done. You need hit the running back at the line of scrimmage or in the backfield. And you need to get to the quarterback and disrupt the offensive rhythm.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 

I don't buy it.

I'm of the mindset that losing Nick Collins may have cost us another title. I think he was that good. But given the choice between an elite safety and elite pass rusher, I'll take the pass rusher every time.

We're in a day and age where defensive backs aren't allowed to defend receivers down field. And we are in a time where safety really isn't that deep of a position across the league, potentially because of the rule changes.

Defense is won up front. You need to win the line of scrimmage, however that is done. You need hit the running back at the line of scrimmage or in the backfield. And you need to get to the quarterback and disrupt the offensive rhythm.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys