2024 Draft Summary · PACKERSHOME

Martha Careful
Member Topic Starter

8 months ago

Draft Pick ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,...................................... Martha's Thoughts
Rd 1: No. 25- Jordan Morgan, OT, Arizona -- Great Pick, Great Feet, Fills a Need and a good guy and leader
Rd 2: No. 45-Edgerrin Cooper, LB, Texas A&M -- Best LB in the draft and we need them but dumb
Rd 2: No. 58- Javon Bullard, S, Georgia -- Best S in the draft and we need them
Rd 3: No. 88-MarShawn Lloyd, RB, USC -- I love this pick, a slasher and great receiver
Rd 3: No. 91 (from BUF)-Ty’Ron Hopper, LB, Missouri -- Head Scratcher, a waste IMO, and dumb
Rd 4: No. 111 (from NYJ)-Evan Williams, S, Oregon -- I like the pick…we need S's
Rd 5: No 163 (from BUF)-Jacob Monk, C, Duke -- Good Pick for IOL depth and a leader
Rd 5: No. 169-Kitan Oladapo, S, Oregon State -- More Safety depth
Rd 6: No. 202-Travis Glover, OT, Georgia State - Not a chance, a wasted pick
Rd 7: No. 245-Michael Pratt, QB, Tulane -- Like the pick as an emergency QB
Rd 7: No. 255--Kalen King, CB, Penn State -- Burnt like toast against quality recs. a Safety?

Overall
Overall, I would give it a B. Higher if we had gotten a true corner and hadn't wasted two pick. I think they must feel Stokes will be healthy and the Valentine will step up. I also think we may see a lot of 3 safety looks in our new defense.

Go Packers!!!!

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

beast
Select Member

8 months ago

I wonder what the Vegas Odds are for Packers drafting a CB in Round 1 in 2025, one might consider it.

earthquake
Member

8 months ago

"Best LB in the draft and we need them but dumb"

I'm not quite sure how to reconcile the "but dumb" part of this note. Best LB in the draft the mid-second, where good LBs usually go, when LB is a clear need. What's dumb about that? I assume you wanted a CB there instead?

blank

earthquake
Member

8 months ago

I found it interesting that they took three safeties. Two wasn't a surprise but the third seemed a little goofy. I wonder if they view one of them as more of a nickle? Or light LB? That would make sense except they took two LBs too.

About that - two LBs before day three was surprising as well. I guess in a 4-3 you need 3 LBs so it makes some sense, but I expect they'll play more of a 4-2-5 the majority of the time. So I only expected 1 in the first three rounds.

A little surprised that they didn't take a single edge or DL. I guess this answers the question of whether they think they have the right guys to play on the defensive line in the new system.

A few OL to the surprise of absolutely no one. No WRs or TEs as expected as well.

Overall I like the draft just fine.

blank

beast
Select Member

8 months ago

Originally Posted by: earthquake

I was racking my brain trying to figure out why these players/positions and I think I figured it out, and if I'm correct it's all due to scheme.

I think the Packers lacked the players and depth to fit the scheme, and the scheme that draft makes the most sense to me is Tony Dungy schemes cover 2 or Tampa 2.

The DL is all about penetration, forcing them to get the ball out of the pocket. They also blitz a lot to help, including run blitzes.

The coverage is off zone, watching and reading the offense knowing they'll have to get the ball out quickly and their job is to read it, and rally to the ball and either make a play on the ball or make a quick tackle.

It's all about speed and attacking and the guys we got fit that perfectly.

These players don't make sense in a non-attcking system.

And I'm not 100% sure, but I believe those schemes played more 4-3 base than other schemes as they have athletic 4-3 OLBs which can match up better on WRs than other as schemes. So yes, we might be seeing Walker or one of the rookie LBers match up on a WR from time to time.

Three Safeties is for multiple reasons... including other then the one FA, we don't have any Safeties we can trust. S Bullard's best spot might be the nickel slot CB role, but he can also play FS, and probably SS. The other two Safeties are probably best at SS.

Also this years changes on STs has teams thinking speed will matter less on Kickoffs and they can use more Safety and athletic LBers on STs, just what we drafted.

And if those S talked about above can't match up with the WRs, then it's time for those SS to play some coverage LB role.

Which again, all that will include some blitzing.

Martha Careful
Member Topic Starter

8 months ago

Originally Posted by: earthquake

Sorry, in a desire for brevity, I was unclear. I should have said "the gentleman drafted is not bright, low Wonderlic and scouts think he is not a defensive signal caller." Dumb applied to the gentleman selected, not the pick.

Go Packers!!!!

bboystyle
Member

8 months ago

Originally Posted by: earthquake

I was more curious as to why we took two RBs when we have jacobs, dillion and wilson....

beast
Select Member

8 months ago

I was more curious as to why we took two RBs when we have jacobs, dillion and wilson....

Originally Posted by: bboystyle

Remind me whom was the 2nd RB that we took?

Also to my earlier comments, I guess it's most likely we're running the 49ers 4-3 Cover 3 that they took from the Seahawks when Hafley was last in the NFL defenses.

bboystyle
Member

8 months ago

Originally Posted by: beast

Picked up an undrafted RB for no real reason.

beast
Select Member

8 months ago

#10

Picked up an undrafted RB for no real reason.

Originally Posted by: bboystyle

Huh? ALL 32 teams pick up camp bodies for depth because they need camp bodies as top many injuries happen already, even more will happen if you force guys to take more snaps.

I don't know why anyone would be complaining about camp bodies, it's not like they'll have a chance to be on the 53 man roster (unless they're good enough).

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Mucky Tundra (12h) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore

packerfanoutwest (18h) : Feliz Navidad!

Zero2Cool (23h) : Merry Christmas!

beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS