I think Edwards fits what we need inside etc...... 3rd rounder maybe 4th
2024 Draft Thread
- Thread starter Mark87
- Start date
Just starting to get familiar with the 2023 draft pool. There are some decent fits the Packers but that's pretty easy since they have needs everywhere.
It's a very solid year for the OT position with a number of guys that seem early and late Rd1 worthy. Might be a good use of their Rd1 pick no matter where that pick lands.
Seems like a deep year for QB's - don't know how good they'll be, but depending on who you believe there could be anywhere from 4-6 taken in Rd1. I don't know that any will be a sure bet to be better than Love.
The Packers should be able to find RB help but there aren't any premium backs worth a Rd1 pick so they'll have to find a guy, like Edwards above, in Rds 3-5.
Doesn't seem like a lot of DL options early.
Seems a like a nice group of WR's this year. Not sure the Packers want to use a Rd 1 pick on one as that's not their history. I still think a WR in the first few round makes some sense as I'm still not sold on the guys we have right now.
Not many safety options that early, but it's a solid group of CBs and depending on how you view Alexander and Stokes injury issues, it might be worth taking one, but not sure how high in Rd1 they'd want to go.
If the Packers continue to play poor/mediocre football and end up with a top-10 pick it kinda looks like OT will make the most sense, but it's really early and a couple of other options may show up in the top-10. If they start playing better there are a few other positions that might makes some sense in the the middle of Rd1.
It's a very solid year for the OT position with a number of guys that seem early and late Rd1 worthy. Might be a good use of their Rd1 pick no matter where that pick lands.
Seems like a deep year for QB's - don't know how good they'll be, but depending on who you believe there could be anywhere from 4-6 taken in Rd1. I don't know that any will be a sure bet to be better than Love.
The Packers should be able to find RB help but there aren't any premium backs worth a Rd1 pick so they'll have to find a guy, like Edwards above, in Rds 3-5.
Doesn't seem like a lot of DL options early.
Seems a like a nice group of WR's this year. Not sure the Packers want to use a Rd 1 pick on one as that's not their history. I still think a WR in the first few round makes some sense as I'm still not sold on the guys we have right now.
Not many safety options that early, but it's a solid group of CBs and depending on how you view Alexander and Stokes injury issues, it might be worth taking one, but not sure how high in Rd1 they'd want to go.
If the Packers continue to play poor/mediocre football and end up with a top-10 pick it kinda looks like OT will make the most sense, but it's really early and a couple of other options may show up in the top-10. If they start playing better there are a few other positions that might makes some sense in the the middle of Rd1.
- Messages
- 3,738
- Reaction score
- 3,044
I know it might be a crazy though on my part but those injuries are worrisome to me and I would have to say that CB is something the Packers need to think about. Seems like a lot of needs this draft. Highlights, at least imo, that this is going to take a few years to rebuild. Let's just hope this front office is adept at the rebuild.
- Messages
- 4,608
- Reaction score
- 3,271
For me it’s all about the OL and the need to rebuild it. A good OL means you don’t need an all star RB. A good OL means your young QB can take a little extra time to go through progressions and isn’t looking over his shoulder. A good OL gives the WR a few extra seconds to figure things out.
Without a much better OL nothing else will get better
Without a much better OL nothing else will get better
- Messages
- 3,738
- Reaction score
- 3,044
I'm going with OL, S, RB, CB/DL...I want both trenches built tough and then work out from that.
QB pool is not as deep as it looks, even Williams and Maye are getting more and more warts. Frankly past round 2 I wouldn't bother.
- Messages
- 6,965
- Reaction score
- 5,762
I was talking to someone who knows what they are talking about. A top level strength and conditioning coach for a Big 10 school. He told me that some teams, including the Packers, are causing injuries like hamstring pulls to happen, because of how they train and condition players, or "allow them" to condition on their own, during off seasons. He suggested they should look inside their own programs to correct the problem.
He also said that if you suggest it to these people who are running those programs, they'll come up with a thousand reasons they know better than you do, and think your program is just "lucky" to not have them happen near as often. Even if it's a history that's repeated itself for years.
I guess you might say that some people just don't listen.
By the way. His program is among the best every year, when it comes to lost games through muscle injuries.
He also said that if you suggest it to these people who are running those programs, they'll come up with a thousand reasons they know better than you do, and think your program is just "lucky" to not have them happen near as often. Even if it's a history that's repeated itself for years.
I guess you might say that some people just don't listen.
By the way. His program is among the best every year, when it comes to lost games through muscle injuries.
