Q: Matt of Rockford, IL - I am amused by all the Monday morning quarterbacking going on with this or any draft. A true evaluation is not realistic until 2-4 years from now. I support the 1st round pick because rule number one in the NFL is stopping the run. I think Green Bay struggled, remember the Shaun Alexander performance, several times to stop the run when they had to. It's ridiculous to argue that the only way you help Favre is to give him offensive weapons. Just think if Favre were on the Bears last year he would have won a Superbowl. Not because the offense is any better, but because the defense is. Thompson needs to keep drafting the best available player regardless of position. Also, trade down and get as many picks as possible. The draft is not a science, and the more picks you have the more likely you are to land someone good.
A: McGinn - Now all the Packers have to do is win. Right, Matt?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Josh of Brookfield, WI - I've always been willing to give TT a chance, and I definitely believe that you can't know anything about draft picks for several years to come. But I'm pretty pissed off about the Randy Moss deal, which strikes me as very different. The Patriots got Moss for pick #127. The Packers had pick #112. You'd think the Raiders would have preferred the Packers offer. You're getting a known commodity in Moss, who's kind of a pain in the ***, but at least is incredibly talented, but presumably worth a hell of a lot more than a 4th round pick. On average, a 4th rounder has about a 10% chance of being worth anything. Maybe you only get two good years out of Moss, but that's all you want. The only thing I can think of is that they couldn't get a contract worked out with Moss. But who cares about that -- he's still got two years left on his current deal, and given how far below they are below the salary cap, they could just pay him his current salary and get him for two years. You don't want him after two years anyway. You don't want him on a team that's rebuilding, once Favre's gone. Did anyone take Thompson to task on this one and figure out what the hell happened?
A: McGinn - Columnists and bloggers and many with microphones took TT to task. One thing. Moss is not a sure thing. Get that picture out of your mind right now of Moss killing teams inthe late 1990s and early 2000s. I did not see a second of tape or TV of Moss's play the last two years in Oak. But I hvae talked to many personnel people who have studied him. Not the same guy. Hasn't taken care of his body. Even more timid. Lost a step. If he was a sure thing the Raiders would have obtained a D1, a D2 or a D3. He is not the same player, and the Patriots will soon discover that. Plus, he is a jerk. A big-time jerk. He pouts. He had 12 on the Wonderlic. He's selfish. He's weird. He won't work out at your facility. Some teams would not want that around.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dave of Racine - Seriously, will Brett Favre retire before this season starts? Demand a trade? He doesn't deserve this. The Packers keep making false promises to him. I love to watch him, but I also want him to stick it to them. Thompson is a loser who wont go anywhere with this team.
A: McGinn - Dave: Favre didn't exactly play great football the last two years. He has as much to prove at 37 going on 38 as anyone on the roster. Live in the past. This is a win now business, baby, and that means for all 53 guys on the roster.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jack of Whitewater - Can we please bring Mike Holmgren back? He has a clause in his contract that lets him leave Seattle if he offered a GM job.
A: McGinn - Jack: Holmgren was pretty much a failure as a GM. You want him back as GM. Why? Now as coach...that's a whole different ballgame. He is among the greats in the coaching department. But it was Thompson who ran Holmgren's drafts. Holmgren never could stand carrying a stopwatch or sitting through 12 hour draft meetings. Mike Shanahan is like that.Not Holmgren.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Pat of Indianapolis - Bob. Do you agree that this draft class, along with the miserable group TT acquired in 2005 will ruin the Packer's prospects for years to come? While everyone else in the divsion improved, we wound up with a one-armed guy who played three games last year, the 4th best running back at Nebraska, a wide-out I can outrun - who expected to play in Canada next year and a safety that will make us long for the glory-years of Mark Roman. There's nothing close to an impact player here. Do you agree that the Packers are due to slide into semi-permanent mediocrity until Thompson is gone? Why did he sit on his hands this weekend when everyone else was making moves to improve? Was a 4th rounder really too much to pay for Moss? New England didn't think so. I'm just disgusted and wondering how we have to tolerate Thompson and McCarthy. Packer fans should vote with their feet.
A: McGinn - Pat: What do you or anyone else know about these players? Not to be rude but give me a break. The '05 draft produced some decent players. Murphy got hurt. We don't know about Aaron Rodgers.The '06 draft was superb. Do you think that was a pretty talented roster that Thompson inherited in January 2005? Now Thompson and his people have to win. Their players must prove him right. If they don't, he will be gone. But Thompson had a terrific year in 2006 after a lousy year in 2005. We have NO IDEA at this point how he did in 2007.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Adam of Columbia - Bob. I know that a lot of people might be dissatisfied with the Packers' draft picks. I admit, I was surprised when Harrell was taken with the 16th pick. When I thought about it and read more about this guy, I was beginning to see some of the logic behind this. Apparently he probably would have been top 10 skill had he not been injured. Also, with depth in the DT position, they can continuously cycle in fresh legs to keep the OG and C occupied and let the young, fast LBs do their thing. I know others would have wanted to get an offensive talent to help out Brett, but with the depth of that position I could see them getting a good WR or two later on and I did not see Olsen warranting a 16th pick. He was eventually picked 31, so other teams must have thought the same way. Overall, I think this pick might have been a slight reach, but the potential rewards warrant the pick. Do you agree or disagree?
A: McGinn - Adam: I don't see Harrell in the top 10 even if he had played 13 games in 2006. Too limited as a pass rusher. I just don't see it ... having said that, of the 10 or 11 personnel people that I spoke to regarding Harrell, almost no one had anything bad to say about the guy. He will clog the middle. He could become an effective inside pocket pusher. He is big. He is smart. He's a good kid. And D-linemen are darn hard to find. Everyone knows that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike G of Miami - As one who'd hoped the Pack would adsd randy Moss, I'm disappointed that he went to New England and curious: they'd offered from our understanding a 4th round pick, which is what the Pats got him for? insight?
A: McGinn - Who knows what happened? Moss was in charge. He might well have preferred playing for NE, not GB. In fact, he probably did. He knew the furor that would have accompanied his signing with GB. Many, many thousands of GB fans would never have forgotten the fake mooning.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Miles of Las Vegas - Why haven't I heard anything about these players? Where is the help for Brett or are we just building for the future?
A: McGinn - Brett Favre is a Hall of Famer with a year or two left. Thompson once said he never talks personnel with Brett. Thompson doesn't buddy-buddy up with anyone. He hopes to be in it for the long haul. All his moves are designed with that in mind.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Lennie Durow of San Diego - Bob: Thanks for taking our questions on this Monday following the draft. I'm sure it was a long weekend for you. I wanted to see your thoughts on the speed issue for these picks. With the exception of Herrel and the OT, each player picked appeared to include comments that their speed was questionable.
A: McGinn - Hey Lennie: Let's go through it...first time I considered this. Harrell is better than average speed. Jackson is OK. Jones is below average. Rouse is better than average. Barbre is exceptional. Clowney is exceptional. Hall is OK. Bishop is below average. Crosby ... I dunno. Wynn is very, very fast. And Harris is OK. You add it up. Doesn't sound like a speed void to me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ron of Grafton - First round TT drafts a player 99 on your 100 best list. A lot of that appears due to injury otherwise he may have been a top 10. Then again if worms had hips... I consider it a worthwhile gamble given his upside. Some of the other high picks appear puzzling to the "experts". Will they pan out? I see the top part of this draft as a swing for the fences. Harrell as a Rob Deer swing, and others as a Jim Gantner swing. Does TT hit the longball, or does he strike out? Anyway I am going to enjoy the rest of this beautiful day, and worry about the Packers another time.
A: McGinn - Ron: I'm not sure what you mean about my 100 best list? I don't produce anything like that. I had Harrell 27 in mock. I had him 18 before moving him to 27 at the last minute. He was taken about right. He would have been going by 21 or so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jeff of Mercer, Wi - Bob, admit it, you have to be thinking the same thing the rest of us are thinking, that this draft is the beginning of the end for Ted Thompson?....I'm one of those draft nuts and I spend a lot of spare time on it throughout the college and pro season...no, I'm not a pro scout, but I bet you a cold beer, the majority of these draftees are gone by 3 years from now, when a new GM and coach has been brought in to clean house, and pull this franchise up out of the gutter that TT and McCarthy have driven it into.......I've tried to stay in TT's corner from the beginning, but no longer....he can't be serious about this draft! teams win with playmakers not 5th, 6th, and 7th round round project draft choices.....sure once in a while any team can strike it rich down there, but not enough to justify continually trading down.......the trade down in the second round cost the Packers a chance at a WR or RB who might have made a difference this year....ok Bob, tell me, who, out of this draft, is going to help the team this year??? who??....take a look at the schedule and tell me how many wins you see with the same team from last year minus Green/Martin???.......1? 2? can you see TT with the top pick in the entire draft next year? maybe he'll trade it for a future #5 pick, and then draft another kicker!
A: McGinn - Jeff: Teams win with a few stars and many, many good players. You and I have no idea about these players. Tony Moll seemed like the dumbest reach in the world a year ago. Yet, the guy is athletic and can play. James Jones seems to me to be a ridiculous pick. But I've never laid eyes on the guy or talked to a single scout about him. Have you? All this instant analysis is laughable. Anyone who grades a draft today or in the next week is a fool. Don't even bother reading that garbage. We have no standard for deciding if a draft was good or not. What, some magazine or website ratings are the gospel for consensus in the NFL? Not quite. Go slow. You don't know. I don't know. These mysteries will start to become unraveled once they put on pads in late July. Not before. So cool it. Have your opinions. Read all you want. Just know almost none of it is worth anything.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Bill of Chicago - Hey Bob, on the subject of Randy Moss, the Patriots claimed they timed him in the 40 at 4.29 sec. Given that Moss' size and speed were always his strengths, wouldn't he be worth a third round pick? Did the Packers have much interest?
A: McGinn - Bill: We do not know how much they wanted him. Thompson won't say. He never says. That's what makes him so different from Ron Wolf. He does not thing it necessary to inform this team's fan base of what is happening. Yes, they were interested. That was clear in February. But Thompson, right or wrong, drew a line in the sand. And Moss and the Patriots did the rest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: TexPack of Houston - Last year it appeared that TE was a need. We considered Vernon Davis. After losing Martin and a subpar year for Bubba, why wasn't Greg Olsen a consideration? It appears that the Pack aimed to draft the best "unknown" players this year. What's your take on their draft overall?
A: McGinn - TP: Olsen can't block. Thus, he wasn't worth a top 20 pick. He went 31. Made sense to me ... I have no overall "take" on this draft. I can tell you what I've been told by scouts regarding individual players. That is all I'm capable of doing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dale of Kalamazoo, MI - Ted Thompson seems determined to stick to his plan of building from within, not trading up, being conservative in free agency, and not pursuing trades (see Randy Moss situation today). Except for the signing last year of Woodson, he never seems to be willing to do what Ron Wolf did and what New England did this offseason and weekend and most other teams do more than the Packers: take a chance on finding a true impact player . I know he is trying to build the "infrastructure" with all of his late round picks, but after a while won't he have to swing for the fences once? Can there truly always be a reason not to do this?
A: McGinn - Dale: We shall see. I gave Thompson a D-minus for his 12-month performance in 2005 and a B-plus for his 12-month performance in 2006. We're four months into 2007. WE shall see how his handiwork plays out in the next eight months.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Danl of Hudson WI - Two questions: First, ever drapft pick's bio reads like they are "going to be great/a real savior". What are the kinds of realities that hit between getting drafted and being an NFL benchwarmer instead of a star or starter (if you make the team at all)? Question 2 is more technical - what is a "three technique" lineman?
A: McGinn - Danl: Teams love to get guys on their field. That means so much. After a few days, you start to see if a player is intimidated. If he is willing to commit himself to the amazingly difficult workout regimen that it takes to play in the NFL. If his skills translate to the NFL level. If he gets along. If he has "it." ... A three-technique DT is the term used for the DT in a 4-3 under scheme. He plays to the strong side of the formation on the outside shoulder of the guard. He generally is quicker and lighter than the nose tackle, who lines up on the shoulder of the center in a cocked or semi-cocked position.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dave of Berkeley, CA - Bob, greetings from the Bay Area. My question is about James Jones -- the press out here and people close to the San Jose State program all seemed very surprised that Jones went as high as the third round. Any insight on why TT used such a high pick to get him, rather than waiting a round or two? Did he have reason to believe some other team was likely to take him high?
A: McGinn - Dave: Absolutely no idea. You heard what TT said about the kid. I have nothing to add. I know zilch right now about the guy. Not proud to admit it but that is the truth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Joe of Madison - Some of the Packers picks were referred to as reaches based on on-line mock drafts. These same drafts had Ben Patrick rated as a 2nd round pick, he went in the 7th (there are many more examples that I won't waste space with). Why are they given so much credibility when they are often so wrong? Why does the JS use them to evaluate Thompsons job performance?
A: McGinn - Joe: I can only speak for myself. I didn't even look at a single mock draft before doing mine. What fun would that be? You buy this newspaper or online service, you deserve our unvarnished opinions ... for better or worse. From my standpoint, I try to evaluate Thompson on the basis of NFL consensus. You might notice those polls in the draft series. In my opinion, that's the best available means to know who really are the top players at each position.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: TKaz of Short Pump VA - Bob, Will this draft be remembered and revered in the future as the draft in which the Packers finally went out and did something to improve their Special Teams in spite of all their other needs? Are the GBP personnel people just that much smarter than EVERYONE else in the league? If so, then maybe there's hope. TKAZ
A:McGinn - Kaz: I doubt GB's scouts are smarter than anyone else. They're just like everyone else in the league nowadays. There are almost no lousy personnel departments anymore. It just comes to one decisionmaker ultimately making the call between some evenly matched players. That separates the men from the boys in personnel work. ... as for special teams, Thompson appeared to pay attention to them over the weekend.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Steve of Marshfield - It seems that the overall feel is that Ron Wolf was the Holy Grail of GMs, and he did do a great job for the Pack. However, he did a relatively poor, if not horrible, job in the upper rounds of the draft, making up for it with FAs, trades and picking scraps from the waiver wire. Giving TT the benefit of the doubt, he may be a notch or two above Wolf in drafting. However, he seems to avoid trading picks for players like the plague, is overly concerned about being in the top 5 teams for availible cap space (which does no good, if you never spend it) and, except for selecting players with a history of injuries, afraid to take risks. That combination seems to me to be the formula for building average teams. Which of the two approaches is better?
A: McGinn - Steve: We know what Wolf produced. We have seen Thompson's results after two years. Neither inherited much. Wolf worked about a decade. Thompson is 20% of the way toward that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike of Elm Grove - Bob- Thanks for the job you do covering our team. The rational side of me knows it takes a few years to adequately judge the quality of a draft, but it sure feels like every other NFC North team got a little better since the end of last year, and the Pack moved backwards. It just seems like this league (FA, Draft, etc.) may be moving too fast for Thompson and he doesn't have enough conviction and contingency for acquiring and keeping talent. I'm not saying overpay for A. Green, but you need something more than Morency. If you are serious about getting Moss, then make it happen - it was there for months. If you wanted Sidney Rice because you are convinced he is your guy - get a back bone, trade up and get him. It just seems like there is no conviction on the talent and direction. If there was, he wouldn't stand there at the end of the draft with the deer in the headlights look, feeling good about the fact 8 out of the 11 picks can play special teams. Has anyone broke the news to him that he doesn't have 10 years to build a winner? TT needs to know "Hope is not a Strategy". So, my question is, after 3 drafts, do we really understand his strategy/approach and is it something that has any chance to bear fruit in your opinion?
A: Bob McGinn - Mike: Who says Thompson doesn't have 10 years? Does being comfortable in front of cameras affect the won-lost record? For an NFL GM, Thompson is young in the business. We can say he loves the draft. That was said of him before he arrived. Bob Harlan knew that about Thompson before hiring him. Will he deal and attack if his team ever nears championship level? We don't know because he hasn't been there yet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: campbell of salisbury, england - Bob, how will the Packers deploy Aaron Rouse?
A: McGinn - Strong safety. Special teams. First thing they must do is get him back to his 2005 form and not his 2006 form. Night and day difference between the two.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mitchell Witt of Eagan Mn - Seems like the 16th pick is a good time to take an educated risk on a player like Harrell, the defense started to look good towards the end of the season, and as they say, games are won up front. Your thoughts
A: McGinn - Mitchell: From what I was told by scouts, the player that I really liked was Reggie Nelson.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: steve plotkin of Henderson, Nevada - I was expecting lobster and I got fish sticks! So are these 11 guys going to replace all 11 guys who played special teams last year? I guess that's a step in the right direction. Anybody see this years schedule? Does 5-11 look about right? As a Packer fan I hope there's 5 all pros in this draft and TT gets the last laugh because right now all of my non packer friends have been calling me and saying there are some nice players at the top of the 2008 draft!
A: McGinn - Steve: The division remains lousy and the NFC has no heavyweight. Why would you consign this team to 5-11 when their only loss from last year was Green? Talk about nonsense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jay of Plover - Bob, I am in no position to question the pick of Justin Harrell in the 1st round becasue I have not spent the entire year watching film and studying tendencies like the Packer scouting staff has. What surprises me (and frankly concerns me) is that with Thompson's conservative nature, he rests the 16th best pick on the draft on a player that has a serious injury history. In fact, no one knows whether or not he will ever regain his former first round form. Also, from what I have read... Justin Harrell seems like a Ryan Pickett clone. By that I mean another run stuffer with very little pass rush. With 3 years left on Ryan's contract, why did they pick up such a player (injury prone and clone of another player with 3 years remaining)? Thanks in advance.
A: McGinn - Jay: He's 2 1 /2 inches taller than Pickett and probably a better athlete. ... I agree. The injury thing is a risk factor of enormous magnitude ... Corey Williams has just one year left on his contract and if can leave as a UFA. This is protection against a void there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dan of Stoughton - I am really not keen on this yrs draft. I think Ted took to many flyers our reaches. I hope these players prove me wrong.Also I would like to see Ted grow some stones.Take a chance once in awhile (Moss, Turner)? Thanks.
A: McGinn - Dan: So would a lot of people, obviously. Some work (Keith Jackson, Brett Favre)and some don't (John Hadl, Mossy Cade). Thompson is sticking by what he thinks he does best, and that's picking draft players better than his peers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tom Hofmann of Fort Myers - Hi Bob, I think TT did fine in the draft considering his spots, and it seems Moss really wanted to play for NE, not us. My concern, then, is that Minnesota and Detroit each might have drafted a "game changer" in the first round. We might have gotten behind in that department. But TT also seems to be trying to build a solid defense first, (with Harrell by giving the linebackers less blockers to deal with) so that when Favre leaves we have defense to hang our hat on instead of Favre. However, it does not look like Favre was given much to help him in his last year. Do you think Favre feels they are throwing him to the wolves with that offense?
A: McGinn - If Favre came back in 2006 to that perceived mess, he probably is excited about this season. He knows McCarthy. He's got Driver. Green was nearing the point where he would need replacing anyway. The O-line could be good. He has a young speed WR in Clowney. Maybe Ferguson will return. Bodiford and Holiday were worth looks. Jennings is highly regarded by pro scouts across the league. There's a lot to like about Favre. Not the least of which he has a team and a fan base that still love him to death. Now he has to hold up his end of the bargain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Kimberly of Sheboygan, Wi - Mr . McGinn, Did Ted Thompson stay true to the board in this draft?
A: McGinn - Kimberly: How would I know that?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mark of Columbus - Hi Bob. Any insight as to why the Packers passed on Ohio State RB Antonio Pittman in favor of Brandon Jackson? I saw a lot of Pittman at OSU and he seemed to be a solid pick, although I know nothing about Jackson.
A: Bob McGinn - They ultimately came to th conclusion that Jackson broke more tackles than Pittman.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Craig of Milwaukee - It seems like everyone is a little upset because the Packers drafted a guy who wasn't on everyone's mock draft. It seems fairly obvious to me that the team's draft boards bear very little resemblance to everyone's mock drafts. Do you have an idea about how other teams ranked Harrell? Particularly Denver which was drafting right behind Green Bay and seemed to be in a mood to draft DL.
A: McGinn - Craig: Thompson fell in love with Harrell. Happens all the time in the scouting racket. Based on polls with 18 scouts, Harrell was the No. 2 DT in the draft. Reading between the lines from Shanahan, Denver could have taken him at 21. Cincy at 18 was another potential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Bob of Mequon - Why is Ted Thompson so cheap? I mean do you know how embarrassing it was to see Frank Walker on the Key Addition line during the draft? Why not go out and spend money and let this team compete?
A:McGinn - Bob: Because there's a lot of junk out there in UFA. Not all of it but quite a bit of it. The Packers have a ton of bodies entering the offseason. They needed quality. That's why I was a bit surprised to add Thompson adding picks again this year. By trading down he lost out on some good players in the D2 and D4.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Chad of Holmen, WI - I just read an article from ESPN's John Clayton. In it he said the reason Moss went to N.E. is because he was willing to redo his contract in order to play for a contender. He was not willing to do the same for the Packers. I know the Packers have around 14 million in salary cap space, but why would anyone want to sign a moody, mercurial athlete who may be past his prime anyway? I never thought Moss would've fit real well into Green Bay anyway. I've heard he doesn't run good routes, and he hates to go over the middle and block. Those are things a WR in this offense needs to do well to be successful. He only likes to go deep. In contrast, I've heard James Jones is a physical receiver, who isn't afraid to go over the middle, and he runs good routes. David Clowney is raw, but is fast and could provide a legitimate deep threat. My point is this: isn't there more value to finding younger players who fit your system?
A: McGinn - Chad: Green Bay wanted Moss. Remember that. But the Packers didn't get them. It may reflect the comparative luster of the GB and NE franchises. It might reflect Brady vs. Favre. It might reflect Thompson/McCarthy vs. Belichick. It may reflect the Fox Valley vs. New England/Boston. And it may reflect how much Thompson was willing to give.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: packfan in jagland of Jacksonville, FL - Bob, Thanks for the voice of reason among the flurry of draft grades. It would appear to me that, short of the top few lottery picks (even made Matt Millen appear smart) all of the teams struggled on the early rounds -- based alone on the amount of time each team took on the clock. I think that indecision should give ANYONE pause to criticize anyone's picks until they get in pads and a few years of actual experience. If I would venture one snap judgement, based on the past two years, Thompson makes leaves little to chance and his draft choices reflect that. Hawk was as solid, gamble-free a choice as he could have made. Despite the injury history, Harrell seems the same. You can't fault a guy who's building a roster for looking to build overall depth until this team could prove it's close enough to the top in order to take a gamble to put it over the top.
A: McGinn - Jag: Thompson couldn't agree more.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Matt of Madison - Hi Bob, You must realize that you are part of the problem as Packer fans are gathering their pitchforks and torches for TT. By offering the excellent pre-draft coverage that you do, fans expect TT to rank players in a similar fashion. The interesting question though, with some of the Packers picks, is why did TT feel compelled to pick them when he did? Someone (Maybe you?) did some excellent reporting when Nick Collins was picked in the second round of the 2005 draft, a couple rounds ahead of where everyone thought he would be. Apparently the Jets had their sights on him and would have taken him if the Packers had not. Does anyone know if there were others teams eyeing up Brandon Jackson or James Jones that early in the draft?
A: McGinn - Matt: Not now I don't. Why did he make the picks? After months of study, he determined they were the best guys. He might be wrong. He might be right. No one knows.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Gerry B. of St.Peters Mo. - Hi, More of a comment than question.All the critics seem to consider all leaders, political,business, sports etc to be dumb clucks and morons. I always wonder how this can be,and all the truck drivers caggies,retailers bar stool warmers are all genius rocket scientists. I happen to see this as a very good draft, at least itadds strength and depth to most positions. They drafted RB and WR suoted to the system we have. Granted we are still looking for a top 5 pick "play Maker" The power went through picks 14 & 15 and dare I say it , maybe 16?? I say that as I watched "NFL Network" coverage. They interviewed Denver#21 coach Mike Shanahan asking him why he trade up with Jacksonville to #17instead of just waiting for his pick Jarvis Moss to come to &21. His reply was he had3 players under consideration. GREEN BAYat 16 took the player J.Harrell he wanted , so he felt the need to move up or possibly miss the player he next sought. So, if all PACKER scouts,G.M.,coachs all fall into the stupid moron class.maybe just maybe,DENVER may have been bright enough to want HARRELL in the first round and we just stumbled into something. I know if its not a sure thing everyone gets wobbly kneed and leather lunged but lets at least let them get to camp. Best regards G.
A: McGinn - GB: I wouldn't call it a good draft. But I wouldn't call it a bad draft or any kind of a draft, either. You watch a game, you evaluate against winning or losing. You watch a draft, you evaluate it against what? The Heisman Trophy voting? What Mel Kiper says? What the Journal Sentinel ratings were? What every scout.com and Mr. Drug Store.com and draftomnibus and great white north says? C'mon. How do you know if Rouse can play or Clowney can play or Crosby can kick? Those answers will starting coming in August. I know this is fun. It's what sports has become. We do the draft series to give you, the readers, some information to make some kind of informed opinion. But to put any stock in those opinions compared to guys with tapes of every games guys have played and the time to watch them all ... puh-leeze. Let's know our place a little bit. ... But let me say this in closing. Thompson and his people have the best facilities and resources and job environment in the league. They are in those jobs to make many more good decisions than bad ones compared to their peers. They are charged with winning. And if they don't win, they deserve to leave and let someone else have a chance with those same facilities and resources and hands-off approach by management. They know that, too. No hard feelings. Just business///thanks for the rants.
TOP HAT"S NOTE: NO FAN OF MCGINN. FYI.
A: McGinn - Now all the Packers have to do is win. Right, Matt?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Josh of Brookfield, WI - I've always been willing to give TT a chance, and I definitely believe that you can't know anything about draft picks for several years to come. But I'm pretty pissed off about the Randy Moss deal, which strikes me as very different. The Patriots got Moss for pick #127. The Packers had pick #112. You'd think the Raiders would have preferred the Packers offer. You're getting a known commodity in Moss, who's kind of a pain in the ***, but at least is incredibly talented, but presumably worth a hell of a lot more than a 4th round pick. On average, a 4th rounder has about a 10% chance of being worth anything. Maybe you only get two good years out of Moss, but that's all you want. The only thing I can think of is that they couldn't get a contract worked out with Moss. But who cares about that -- he's still got two years left on his current deal, and given how far below they are below the salary cap, they could just pay him his current salary and get him for two years. You don't want him after two years anyway. You don't want him on a team that's rebuilding, once Favre's gone. Did anyone take Thompson to task on this one and figure out what the hell happened?
A: McGinn - Columnists and bloggers and many with microphones took TT to task. One thing. Moss is not a sure thing. Get that picture out of your mind right now of Moss killing teams inthe late 1990s and early 2000s. I did not see a second of tape or TV of Moss's play the last two years in Oak. But I hvae talked to many personnel people who have studied him. Not the same guy. Hasn't taken care of his body. Even more timid. Lost a step. If he was a sure thing the Raiders would have obtained a D1, a D2 or a D3. He is not the same player, and the Patriots will soon discover that. Plus, he is a jerk. A big-time jerk. He pouts. He had 12 on the Wonderlic. He's selfish. He's weird. He won't work out at your facility. Some teams would not want that around.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dave of Racine - Seriously, will Brett Favre retire before this season starts? Demand a trade? He doesn't deserve this. The Packers keep making false promises to him. I love to watch him, but I also want him to stick it to them. Thompson is a loser who wont go anywhere with this team.
A: McGinn - Dave: Favre didn't exactly play great football the last two years. He has as much to prove at 37 going on 38 as anyone on the roster. Live in the past. This is a win now business, baby, and that means for all 53 guys on the roster.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jack of Whitewater - Can we please bring Mike Holmgren back? He has a clause in his contract that lets him leave Seattle if he offered a GM job.
A: McGinn - Jack: Holmgren was pretty much a failure as a GM. You want him back as GM. Why? Now as coach...that's a whole different ballgame. He is among the greats in the coaching department. But it was Thompson who ran Holmgren's drafts. Holmgren never could stand carrying a stopwatch or sitting through 12 hour draft meetings. Mike Shanahan is like that.Not Holmgren.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Pat of Indianapolis - Bob. Do you agree that this draft class, along with the miserable group TT acquired in 2005 will ruin the Packer's prospects for years to come? While everyone else in the divsion improved, we wound up with a one-armed guy who played three games last year, the 4th best running back at Nebraska, a wide-out I can outrun - who expected to play in Canada next year and a safety that will make us long for the glory-years of Mark Roman. There's nothing close to an impact player here. Do you agree that the Packers are due to slide into semi-permanent mediocrity until Thompson is gone? Why did he sit on his hands this weekend when everyone else was making moves to improve? Was a 4th rounder really too much to pay for Moss? New England didn't think so. I'm just disgusted and wondering how we have to tolerate Thompson and McCarthy. Packer fans should vote with their feet.
A: McGinn - Pat: What do you or anyone else know about these players? Not to be rude but give me a break. The '05 draft produced some decent players. Murphy got hurt. We don't know about Aaron Rodgers.The '06 draft was superb. Do you think that was a pretty talented roster that Thompson inherited in January 2005? Now Thompson and his people have to win. Their players must prove him right. If they don't, he will be gone. But Thompson had a terrific year in 2006 after a lousy year in 2005. We have NO IDEA at this point how he did in 2007.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Adam of Columbia - Bob. I know that a lot of people might be dissatisfied with the Packers' draft picks. I admit, I was surprised when Harrell was taken with the 16th pick. When I thought about it and read more about this guy, I was beginning to see some of the logic behind this. Apparently he probably would have been top 10 skill had he not been injured. Also, with depth in the DT position, they can continuously cycle in fresh legs to keep the OG and C occupied and let the young, fast LBs do their thing. I know others would have wanted to get an offensive talent to help out Brett, but with the depth of that position I could see them getting a good WR or two later on and I did not see Olsen warranting a 16th pick. He was eventually picked 31, so other teams must have thought the same way. Overall, I think this pick might have been a slight reach, but the potential rewards warrant the pick. Do you agree or disagree?
A: McGinn - Adam: I don't see Harrell in the top 10 even if he had played 13 games in 2006. Too limited as a pass rusher. I just don't see it ... having said that, of the 10 or 11 personnel people that I spoke to regarding Harrell, almost no one had anything bad to say about the guy. He will clog the middle. He could become an effective inside pocket pusher. He is big. He is smart. He's a good kid. And D-linemen are darn hard to find. Everyone knows that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike G of Miami - As one who'd hoped the Pack would adsd randy Moss, I'm disappointed that he went to New England and curious: they'd offered from our understanding a 4th round pick, which is what the Pats got him for? insight?
A: McGinn - Who knows what happened? Moss was in charge. He might well have preferred playing for NE, not GB. In fact, he probably did. He knew the furor that would have accompanied his signing with GB. Many, many thousands of GB fans would never have forgotten the fake mooning.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Miles of Las Vegas - Why haven't I heard anything about these players? Where is the help for Brett or are we just building for the future?
A: McGinn - Brett Favre is a Hall of Famer with a year or two left. Thompson once said he never talks personnel with Brett. Thompson doesn't buddy-buddy up with anyone. He hopes to be in it for the long haul. All his moves are designed with that in mind.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Lennie Durow of San Diego - Bob: Thanks for taking our questions on this Monday following the draft. I'm sure it was a long weekend for you. I wanted to see your thoughts on the speed issue for these picks. With the exception of Herrel and the OT, each player picked appeared to include comments that their speed was questionable.
A: McGinn - Hey Lennie: Let's go through it...first time I considered this. Harrell is better than average speed. Jackson is OK. Jones is below average. Rouse is better than average. Barbre is exceptional. Clowney is exceptional. Hall is OK. Bishop is below average. Crosby ... I dunno. Wynn is very, very fast. And Harris is OK. You add it up. Doesn't sound like a speed void to me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ron of Grafton - First round TT drafts a player 99 on your 100 best list. A lot of that appears due to injury otherwise he may have been a top 10. Then again if worms had hips... I consider it a worthwhile gamble given his upside. Some of the other high picks appear puzzling to the "experts". Will they pan out? I see the top part of this draft as a swing for the fences. Harrell as a Rob Deer swing, and others as a Jim Gantner swing. Does TT hit the longball, or does he strike out? Anyway I am going to enjoy the rest of this beautiful day, and worry about the Packers another time.
A: McGinn - Ron: I'm not sure what you mean about my 100 best list? I don't produce anything like that. I had Harrell 27 in mock. I had him 18 before moving him to 27 at the last minute. He was taken about right. He would have been going by 21 or so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jeff of Mercer, Wi - Bob, admit it, you have to be thinking the same thing the rest of us are thinking, that this draft is the beginning of the end for Ted Thompson?....I'm one of those draft nuts and I spend a lot of spare time on it throughout the college and pro season...no, I'm not a pro scout, but I bet you a cold beer, the majority of these draftees are gone by 3 years from now, when a new GM and coach has been brought in to clean house, and pull this franchise up out of the gutter that TT and McCarthy have driven it into.......I've tried to stay in TT's corner from the beginning, but no longer....he can't be serious about this draft! teams win with playmakers not 5th, 6th, and 7th round round project draft choices.....sure once in a while any team can strike it rich down there, but not enough to justify continually trading down.......the trade down in the second round cost the Packers a chance at a WR or RB who might have made a difference this year....ok Bob, tell me, who, out of this draft, is going to help the team this year??? who??....take a look at the schedule and tell me how many wins you see with the same team from last year minus Green/Martin???.......1? 2? can you see TT with the top pick in the entire draft next year? maybe he'll trade it for a future #5 pick, and then draft another kicker!
A: McGinn - Jeff: Teams win with a few stars and many, many good players. You and I have no idea about these players. Tony Moll seemed like the dumbest reach in the world a year ago. Yet, the guy is athletic and can play. James Jones seems to me to be a ridiculous pick. But I've never laid eyes on the guy or talked to a single scout about him. Have you? All this instant analysis is laughable. Anyone who grades a draft today or in the next week is a fool. Don't even bother reading that garbage. We have no standard for deciding if a draft was good or not. What, some magazine or website ratings are the gospel for consensus in the NFL? Not quite. Go slow. You don't know. I don't know. These mysteries will start to become unraveled once they put on pads in late July. Not before. So cool it. Have your opinions. Read all you want. Just know almost none of it is worth anything.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Bill of Chicago - Hey Bob, on the subject of Randy Moss, the Patriots claimed they timed him in the 40 at 4.29 sec. Given that Moss' size and speed were always his strengths, wouldn't he be worth a third round pick? Did the Packers have much interest?
A: McGinn - Bill: We do not know how much they wanted him. Thompson won't say. He never says. That's what makes him so different from Ron Wolf. He does not thing it necessary to inform this team's fan base of what is happening. Yes, they were interested. That was clear in February. But Thompson, right or wrong, drew a line in the sand. And Moss and the Patriots did the rest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: TexPack of Houston - Last year it appeared that TE was a need. We considered Vernon Davis. After losing Martin and a subpar year for Bubba, why wasn't Greg Olsen a consideration? It appears that the Pack aimed to draft the best "unknown" players this year. What's your take on their draft overall?
A: McGinn - TP: Olsen can't block. Thus, he wasn't worth a top 20 pick. He went 31. Made sense to me ... I have no overall "take" on this draft. I can tell you what I've been told by scouts regarding individual players. That is all I'm capable of doing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dale of Kalamazoo, MI - Ted Thompson seems determined to stick to his plan of building from within, not trading up, being conservative in free agency, and not pursuing trades (see Randy Moss situation today). Except for the signing last year of Woodson, he never seems to be willing to do what Ron Wolf did and what New England did this offseason and weekend and most other teams do more than the Packers: take a chance on finding a true impact player . I know he is trying to build the "infrastructure" with all of his late round picks, but after a while won't he have to swing for the fences once? Can there truly always be a reason not to do this?
A: McGinn - Dale: We shall see. I gave Thompson a D-minus for his 12-month performance in 2005 and a B-plus for his 12-month performance in 2006. We're four months into 2007. WE shall see how his handiwork plays out in the next eight months.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Danl of Hudson WI - Two questions: First, ever drapft pick's bio reads like they are "going to be great/a real savior". What are the kinds of realities that hit between getting drafted and being an NFL benchwarmer instead of a star or starter (if you make the team at all)? Question 2 is more technical - what is a "three technique" lineman?
A: McGinn - Danl: Teams love to get guys on their field. That means so much. After a few days, you start to see if a player is intimidated. If he is willing to commit himself to the amazingly difficult workout regimen that it takes to play in the NFL. If his skills translate to the NFL level. If he gets along. If he has "it." ... A three-technique DT is the term used for the DT in a 4-3 under scheme. He plays to the strong side of the formation on the outside shoulder of the guard. He generally is quicker and lighter than the nose tackle, who lines up on the shoulder of the center in a cocked or semi-cocked position.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dave of Berkeley, CA - Bob, greetings from the Bay Area. My question is about James Jones -- the press out here and people close to the San Jose State program all seemed very surprised that Jones went as high as the third round. Any insight on why TT used such a high pick to get him, rather than waiting a round or two? Did he have reason to believe some other team was likely to take him high?
A: McGinn - Dave: Absolutely no idea. You heard what TT said about the kid. I have nothing to add. I know zilch right now about the guy. Not proud to admit it but that is the truth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Joe of Madison - Some of the Packers picks were referred to as reaches based on on-line mock drafts. These same drafts had Ben Patrick rated as a 2nd round pick, he went in the 7th (there are many more examples that I won't waste space with). Why are they given so much credibility when they are often so wrong? Why does the JS use them to evaluate Thompsons job performance?
A: McGinn - Joe: I can only speak for myself. I didn't even look at a single mock draft before doing mine. What fun would that be? You buy this newspaper or online service, you deserve our unvarnished opinions ... for better or worse. From my standpoint, I try to evaluate Thompson on the basis of NFL consensus. You might notice those polls in the draft series. In my opinion, that's the best available means to know who really are the top players at each position.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: TKaz of Short Pump VA - Bob, Will this draft be remembered and revered in the future as the draft in which the Packers finally went out and did something to improve their Special Teams in spite of all their other needs? Are the GBP personnel people just that much smarter than EVERYONE else in the league? If so, then maybe there's hope. TKAZ
A:McGinn - Kaz: I doubt GB's scouts are smarter than anyone else. They're just like everyone else in the league nowadays. There are almost no lousy personnel departments anymore. It just comes to one decisionmaker ultimately making the call between some evenly matched players. That separates the men from the boys in personnel work. ... as for special teams, Thompson appeared to pay attention to them over the weekend.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Steve of Marshfield - It seems that the overall feel is that Ron Wolf was the Holy Grail of GMs, and he did do a great job for the Pack. However, he did a relatively poor, if not horrible, job in the upper rounds of the draft, making up for it with FAs, trades and picking scraps from the waiver wire. Giving TT the benefit of the doubt, he may be a notch or two above Wolf in drafting. However, he seems to avoid trading picks for players like the plague, is overly concerned about being in the top 5 teams for availible cap space (which does no good, if you never spend it) and, except for selecting players with a history of injuries, afraid to take risks. That combination seems to me to be the formula for building average teams. Which of the two approaches is better?
A: McGinn - Steve: We know what Wolf produced. We have seen Thompson's results after two years. Neither inherited much. Wolf worked about a decade. Thompson is 20% of the way toward that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike of Elm Grove - Bob- Thanks for the job you do covering our team. The rational side of me knows it takes a few years to adequately judge the quality of a draft, but it sure feels like every other NFC North team got a little better since the end of last year, and the Pack moved backwards. It just seems like this league (FA, Draft, etc.) may be moving too fast for Thompson and he doesn't have enough conviction and contingency for acquiring and keeping talent. I'm not saying overpay for A. Green, but you need something more than Morency. If you are serious about getting Moss, then make it happen - it was there for months. If you wanted Sidney Rice because you are convinced he is your guy - get a back bone, trade up and get him. It just seems like there is no conviction on the talent and direction. If there was, he wouldn't stand there at the end of the draft with the deer in the headlights look, feeling good about the fact 8 out of the 11 picks can play special teams. Has anyone broke the news to him that he doesn't have 10 years to build a winner? TT needs to know "Hope is not a Strategy". So, my question is, after 3 drafts, do we really understand his strategy/approach and is it something that has any chance to bear fruit in your opinion?
A: Bob McGinn - Mike: Who says Thompson doesn't have 10 years? Does being comfortable in front of cameras affect the won-lost record? For an NFL GM, Thompson is young in the business. We can say he loves the draft. That was said of him before he arrived. Bob Harlan knew that about Thompson before hiring him. Will he deal and attack if his team ever nears championship level? We don't know because he hasn't been there yet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: campbell of salisbury, england - Bob, how will the Packers deploy Aaron Rouse?
A: McGinn - Strong safety. Special teams. First thing they must do is get him back to his 2005 form and not his 2006 form. Night and day difference between the two.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mitchell Witt of Eagan Mn - Seems like the 16th pick is a good time to take an educated risk on a player like Harrell, the defense started to look good towards the end of the season, and as they say, games are won up front. Your thoughts
A: McGinn - Mitchell: From what I was told by scouts, the player that I really liked was Reggie Nelson.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: steve plotkin of Henderson, Nevada - I was expecting lobster and I got fish sticks! So are these 11 guys going to replace all 11 guys who played special teams last year? I guess that's a step in the right direction. Anybody see this years schedule? Does 5-11 look about right? As a Packer fan I hope there's 5 all pros in this draft and TT gets the last laugh because right now all of my non packer friends have been calling me and saying there are some nice players at the top of the 2008 draft!
A: McGinn - Steve: The division remains lousy and the NFC has no heavyweight. Why would you consign this team to 5-11 when their only loss from last year was Green? Talk about nonsense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jay of Plover - Bob, I am in no position to question the pick of Justin Harrell in the 1st round becasue I have not spent the entire year watching film and studying tendencies like the Packer scouting staff has. What surprises me (and frankly concerns me) is that with Thompson's conservative nature, he rests the 16th best pick on the draft on a player that has a serious injury history. In fact, no one knows whether or not he will ever regain his former first round form. Also, from what I have read... Justin Harrell seems like a Ryan Pickett clone. By that I mean another run stuffer with very little pass rush. With 3 years left on Ryan's contract, why did they pick up such a player (injury prone and clone of another player with 3 years remaining)? Thanks in advance.
A: McGinn - Jay: He's 2 1 /2 inches taller than Pickett and probably a better athlete. ... I agree. The injury thing is a risk factor of enormous magnitude ... Corey Williams has just one year left on his contract and if can leave as a UFA. This is protection against a void there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dan of Stoughton - I am really not keen on this yrs draft. I think Ted took to many flyers our reaches. I hope these players prove me wrong.Also I would like to see Ted grow some stones.Take a chance once in awhile (Moss, Turner)? Thanks.
A: McGinn - Dan: So would a lot of people, obviously. Some work (Keith Jackson, Brett Favre)and some don't (John Hadl, Mossy Cade). Thompson is sticking by what he thinks he does best, and that's picking draft players better than his peers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tom Hofmann of Fort Myers - Hi Bob, I think TT did fine in the draft considering his spots, and it seems Moss really wanted to play for NE, not us. My concern, then, is that Minnesota and Detroit each might have drafted a "game changer" in the first round. We might have gotten behind in that department. But TT also seems to be trying to build a solid defense first, (with Harrell by giving the linebackers less blockers to deal with) so that when Favre leaves we have defense to hang our hat on instead of Favre. However, it does not look like Favre was given much to help him in his last year. Do you think Favre feels they are throwing him to the wolves with that offense?
A: McGinn - If Favre came back in 2006 to that perceived mess, he probably is excited about this season. He knows McCarthy. He's got Driver. Green was nearing the point where he would need replacing anyway. The O-line could be good. He has a young speed WR in Clowney. Maybe Ferguson will return. Bodiford and Holiday were worth looks. Jennings is highly regarded by pro scouts across the league. There's a lot to like about Favre. Not the least of which he has a team and a fan base that still love him to death. Now he has to hold up his end of the bargain.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Kimberly of Sheboygan, Wi - Mr . McGinn, Did Ted Thompson stay true to the board in this draft?
A: McGinn - Kimberly: How would I know that?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mark of Columbus - Hi Bob. Any insight as to why the Packers passed on Ohio State RB Antonio Pittman in favor of Brandon Jackson? I saw a lot of Pittman at OSU and he seemed to be a solid pick, although I know nothing about Jackson.
A: Bob McGinn - They ultimately came to th conclusion that Jackson broke more tackles than Pittman.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Craig of Milwaukee - It seems like everyone is a little upset because the Packers drafted a guy who wasn't on everyone's mock draft. It seems fairly obvious to me that the team's draft boards bear very little resemblance to everyone's mock drafts. Do you have an idea about how other teams ranked Harrell? Particularly Denver which was drafting right behind Green Bay and seemed to be in a mood to draft DL.
A: McGinn - Craig: Thompson fell in love with Harrell. Happens all the time in the scouting racket. Based on polls with 18 scouts, Harrell was the No. 2 DT in the draft. Reading between the lines from Shanahan, Denver could have taken him at 21. Cincy at 18 was another potential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Bob of Mequon - Why is Ted Thompson so cheap? I mean do you know how embarrassing it was to see Frank Walker on the Key Addition line during the draft? Why not go out and spend money and let this team compete?
A:McGinn - Bob: Because there's a lot of junk out there in UFA. Not all of it but quite a bit of it. The Packers have a ton of bodies entering the offseason. They needed quality. That's why I was a bit surprised to add Thompson adding picks again this year. By trading down he lost out on some good players in the D2 and D4.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Chad of Holmen, WI - I just read an article from ESPN's John Clayton. In it he said the reason Moss went to N.E. is because he was willing to redo his contract in order to play for a contender. He was not willing to do the same for the Packers. I know the Packers have around 14 million in salary cap space, but why would anyone want to sign a moody, mercurial athlete who may be past his prime anyway? I never thought Moss would've fit real well into Green Bay anyway. I've heard he doesn't run good routes, and he hates to go over the middle and block. Those are things a WR in this offense needs to do well to be successful. He only likes to go deep. In contrast, I've heard James Jones is a physical receiver, who isn't afraid to go over the middle, and he runs good routes. David Clowney is raw, but is fast and could provide a legitimate deep threat. My point is this: isn't there more value to finding younger players who fit your system?
A: McGinn - Chad: Green Bay wanted Moss. Remember that. But the Packers didn't get them. It may reflect the comparative luster of the GB and NE franchises. It might reflect Brady vs. Favre. It might reflect Thompson/McCarthy vs. Belichick. It may reflect the Fox Valley vs. New England/Boston. And it may reflect how much Thompson was willing to give.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: packfan in jagland of Jacksonville, FL - Bob, Thanks for the voice of reason among the flurry of draft grades. It would appear to me that, short of the top few lottery picks (even made Matt Millen appear smart) all of the teams struggled on the early rounds -- based alone on the amount of time each team took on the clock. I think that indecision should give ANYONE pause to criticize anyone's picks until they get in pads and a few years of actual experience. If I would venture one snap judgement, based on the past two years, Thompson makes leaves little to chance and his draft choices reflect that. Hawk was as solid, gamble-free a choice as he could have made. Despite the injury history, Harrell seems the same. You can't fault a guy who's building a roster for looking to build overall depth until this team could prove it's close enough to the top in order to take a gamble to put it over the top.
A: McGinn - Jag: Thompson couldn't agree more.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Matt of Madison - Hi Bob, You must realize that you are part of the problem as Packer fans are gathering their pitchforks and torches for TT. By offering the excellent pre-draft coverage that you do, fans expect TT to rank players in a similar fashion. The interesting question though, with some of the Packers picks, is why did TT feel compelled to pick them when he did? Someone (Maybe you?) did some excellent reporting when Nick Collins was picked in the second round of the 2005 draft, a couple rounds ahead of where everyone thought he would be. Apparently the Jets had their sights on him and would have taken him if the Packers had not. Does anyone know if there were others teams eyeing up Brandon Jackson or James Jones that early in the draft?
A: McGinn - Matt: Not now I don't. Why did he make the picks? After months of study, he determined they were the best guys. He might be wrong. He might be right. No one knows.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Gerry B. of St.Peters Mo. - Hi, More of a comment than question.All the critics seem to consider all leaders, political,business, sports etc to be dumb clucks and morons. I always wonder how this can be,and all the truck drivers caggies,retailers bar stool warmers are all genius rocket scientists. I happen to see this as a very good draft, at least itadds strength and depth to most positions. They drafted RB and WR suoted to the system we have. Granted we are still looking for a top 5 pick "play Maker" The power went through picks 14 & 15 and dare I say it , maybe 16?? I say that as I watched "NFL Network" coverage. They interviewed Denver#21 coach Mike Shanahan asking him why he trade up with Jacksonville to #17instead of just waiting for his pick Jarvis Moss to come to &21. His reply was he had3 players under consideration. GREEN BAYat 16 took the player J.Harrell he wanted , so he felt the need to move up or possibly miss the player he next sought. So, if all PACKER scouts,G.M.,coachs all fall into the stupid moron class.maybe just maybe,DENVER may have been bright enough to want HARRELL in the first round and we just stumbled into something. I know if its not a sure thing everyone gets wobbly kneed and leather lunged but lets at least let them get to camp. Best regards G.
A: McGinn - GB: I wouldn't call it a good draft. But I wouldn't call it a bad draft or any kind of a draft, either. You watch a game, you evaluate against winning or losing. You watch a draft, you evaluate it against what? The Heisman Trophy voting? What Mel Kiper says? What the Journal Sentinel ratings were? What every scout.com and Mr. Drug Store.com and draftomnibus and great white north says? C'mon. How do you know if Rouse can play or Clowney can play or Crosby can kick? Those answers will starting coming in August. I know this is fun. It's what sports has become. We do the draft series to give you, the readers, some information to make some kind of informed opinion. But to put any stock in those opinions compared to guys with tapes of every games guys have played and the time to watch them all ... puh-leeze. Let's know our place a little bit. ... But let me say this in closing. Thompson and his people have the best facilities and resources and job environment in the league. They are in those jobs to make many more good decisions than bad ones compared to their peers. They are charged with winning. And if they don't win, they deserve to leave and let someone else have a chance with those same facilities and resources and hands-off approach by management. They know that, too. No hard feelings. Just business///thanks for the rants.
TOP HAT"S NOTE: NO FAN OF MCGINN. FYI.
