When do we draft Rodgers' successor?

[OldSchool101]

Highest draft pick the team has had in years, yet we should entertain taking a quarterback when Rodgers is talking about playing into his 40's and the team has a ton of positions of need? I'll pass.

I'd rather draft a highly talented difference maker that will be on the field next season. The team finally made the necessary changes to put themselves in a position to hopefully upgrade the defense in order to compete for more super bowls. I wouldn't give one thought to drafting a quarterback in the 1st round.

90% of the time you got an immediate contributor at pick #14. This year it's possible that 4-5 QB's are taken before our pick, which puts us picking the #9 or #10 best player other than QB in this draft. Then I've noticed that there are several positions that have multiple players that could go top 10. It all equates to us having a really nice pick at #14 and we MUST keep our eye on the ball here and not get distracted.

Like your point suggested, one thing we learned in 2014? was when we moved CM3 to ILB I believe the prominent reason we improved dramatically, was because for once that season we had the best available talent ON THE FIELD simultaneously. We started shutting teams down and that carried all the way into that Seattle playoff game with a 16-0 lead at the half.

We have a really, really good shot at filling these positions will stellar talent this season if we don't get distracted. OLB, TE, CB, WR, OG.
We can have 2 of those locked by pick #40 or so if we're not afraid to step up round 2. We should have 2 in FA. That leaves 1 more player to step up between the this draft and the last which is entirely possible considering both our 3rd and 4th rounder barely played any in 2017 and we have a slew of picks.

 

[Jed12]

I think Mayfield will be one of the most talked about players in the draft. His polarizing personality and lack of "good height" will scare some away, but it is hard to ignore what he did at Oklahoma. Personally, I hope at least 4 QB's go off the board before the Packers pick, leaving us with better options at position of need.

I will probably be wrong, but I wasn't that impressed with Sam Darnold the 2 times I saw him play. Maybe he has the physical skills to become a great NFL QB, but he is going to need to figure out how to make good decisions with the ball.

Mayfield is this years Tebow or Manziel which I’m not sure is ever a good thing... like them both he has the on and off field spotlight in college. I hope he’s not another one of those but it’s shaping up to be that way.

I’m not a fan of Darnold and as much as the “experts” say he has all of the tangibles to make it in the pro’s I think Rosen is still the best in the draft. He played well for UCLA this season unlike Darnold and the pressure of the moment coming up might of started weighing down on him who knows!

For the record we should not be wasting our first round pick on a QB by any means

 

[McKnowledge]

I don't like thinking about it, but Rodgers isn't a young quarterback anymore. He turned 34 earlier this month, and despite looking as good as ever earlier this season, we probably can expect no more than 4-6 seasons more from him. Few quarterbacks have looked good at 40+. And while I appreciate that Hundley was able to gut it out and win enough games to keep us alive, he obviously isn't our future.

So when do we draft Rodgers' successor? How far off is it? I suspect we don't do it this upcoming draft, but perhaps in 2019? or 2020? It's not in the immediate future, but it's a lot closer than it was a few years ago.

I think drafting a serious successor (1st-3rd round) shouldn't happen until 2020 or 2021, barring anything traumatic happening. I agree. AR12 has three more years of elite play before decline, followed by three more years of top 10 QB level play. This guy has been playing among the stars, it'll take a while for him to come back down to Earth. So let's say 2024, if he is still passionate about the game, is the end. Picking up a successor between 2020-2022 is feasible. If the QB develops fast, its a good problem. Keep him over AR12, or vice versa. Either way, I think the direction of this franchise must look forward towards the future and stop relying on the past. The past cannot stop the future. Surround AR12 with talent, let him have heavy input, pay him, and get the hell out of the way. This season has given Aaron Rodgers a lot of cache by showing us what his absence means for the franchise. This off-season may be one of the most important ones in the history of the Green bay Packers.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

After we get #12 to sign a long term extension. Lol

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Looks like A-Rod has found his successor to Olivia and she is a Bears fan!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com...-packers-fans-know-danica-patrick/1034498001/

 

[Dantés]

Personally, I think we are entering a phase where it could be in play if the right guy is there at the right pick. We won't be in the "we must draft a QB" stage for a few seasons, but it would be justifiable to draft one if great value fell. They need to improve the depth there anyhow. So if a talented prospect is there at a value that the team likes, you take him and let him develop. That's my opinion, anyhow. I also don't think it would be unreasonable to just sign a veteran and pass on the position in the draft altogether if the value isn't there.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Personally, I think we are entering a phase where it could be in play if the right guy is there at the right pick. We won't be in the "we must draft a QB" stage for a few seasons, but it would be justifiable to draft one if great value fell. They need to improve the depth there anyhow. So if a talented prospect is there at a value that the team likes, you take him and let him develop. That's my opinion, anyhow. I also don't think it would be unreasonable to just sign a veteran and pass on the position in the draft altogether if the value isn't there.

What if a QB of "great value" falls to us at #14? Would you really pick him? I sure the hell wouldn't. The Packers have needs at just about every position other than QB. So using your best pick in the draft on a position of little or no need would be wasteful IMO. Not to mention what has been said over and over...if AR plays for as long as he claims he will, the best you could hope for is trading that QB 4 years down the road.

If a QB of great value falls to us early (Rd. 1-4), I would hope Gute is on the phone, trying to trade back and take advantage of another team who actually needs a QB.

 

[Dantés]

What if a QB of "great value" falls to us at #14? Would you really pick him? I sure the hell wouldn't. The Packers have needs at just about every position other than QB. So using your best pick in the draft on a position of little or no need would be wasteful IMO. Not to mention what has been said over and over...if AR plays for as long as he claims he will, the best you could hope for is trading that QB 4 years down the road.

If a QB of great value falls to us early (Rd. 1-4), I would hope Gute is on the phone, trying to trade back and take advantage of another team who actually needs a QB.

I'm not terribly opposed to the idea of it, but the QB's of that caliber aren't making it through the Browns, Giants, Broncos, Jets, and Dolphins to #14.

But in the here and now, I was thinking more of post 1st round.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm not terribly opposed to the idea of it, but the QB's of that caliber aren't making it through the Browns, Giants, Broncos, Jets, and Dolphins to #14.

But in the here and now, I was thinking more of post 1st round.

Who would have thought Rodgers would have dropped to us back in 2005? It can happen and it just might. Always seems to be 1 or 2 guys that are pegged as top 10 and for whatever reason, they start free falling. If that happens, I hope the Packers trade back.

Only way I could justify the Packers using a round 1-5 pick on a QB, would be if they have inside information on Rodgers not being around much longer. I still think they had that feeling about Favre back in 2005 and it made picking Rodgers a no brainer.

But again, if Rodgers is going to be around and can play at a high level for 5 or more years, I just don't see why this year would be the year you invest a pick into a QB. I actually see a scenario where Hundley is resigned and remains the #2 for a long time.

 

[Dantés]

Who would have thought Rodgers would have dropped to us back in 2005? It can happen and it just might. Always seems to be 1 or 2 guys that are pegged as top 10 and for whatever reason, they start free falling. If that happens, I hope the Packers trade back.

Only way I could justify the Packers using a round 1-5 pick on a QB, would be if they have inside information on Rodgers not being around much longer. I still think they had that feeling about Favre back in 2005 and it made picking Rodgers a no brainer.

But again, if Rodgers is going to be around and can play at a high level for 5 or more years, I just don't see why this year would be the year you invest a pick into a QB. I actually see a scenario where Hundley is resigned and remains the #2 for a long time.

1-5? That's pretty extreme. Even if you're certain that Rodgers plays another 4-5 years, we need a better backup in a bad way.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

1-5? That's pretty extreme. Even if you're certain that Rodgers plays another 4-5 years, we need a better backup in a bad way.

So when does that "better backup" take over for Hundley? When does he get playing time? I'm sure people will start pointing to Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins, Tom Brady and Dak Prescott, but really how often does a mid to late round QB do a whole lot? I would prefer Hundley or a vet QB for the next year or 2.

 

[pfcmsh]

I don't like thinking about it, but Rodgers isn't a young quarterback anymore. He turned 34 earlier this month, and despite looking as good as ever earlier this season, we probably can expect no more than 4-6 seasons more from him. Few quarterbacks have looked good at 40+. And while I appreciate that Hundley was able to gut it out and win enough games to keep us alive, he obviously isn't our future.

So when do we draft Rodgers' successor? How far off is it? I suspect we don't do it this upcoming draft, but perhaps in 2019? or 2020? It's not in the immediate future, but it's a lot closer than it was a few years ago.

We need to draft our next qb NOW. I hope Aaron plays 6 more years, but can he COMPLETELY recover from a clavicle that required 13 screws to repair? He is 34 years old guys!! What and when will the next injury be behind an average OL? Aaron loves to extend plays by leaving the pocket. He is vulnerable. MM likes to invest a few years in a qb before giving him the reins. Thats what they did with Rogers. Lets get our guy now. I predict we'll draft our future qb in 2018.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

We need to draft our next qb NOW. I hope Aaron plays 6 more years, but can he COMPLETELY recover from a clavicle that required 13 screws to repair? He is 34 years old guys!! What and when will the next injury be behind an average OL? Aaron loves to extend plays by leaving the pocket. He is vulnerable. MM likes to invest a few years in a qb before giving him the reins. Thats what they did with Rogers. Lets get our guy now. I predict we'll draft our future qb in 2018.

Remember, Favre wasn't "traded" because he wasn't a very good football player or at the end of the line. There were other reasons behind Rogers being drafted and taking over for Favre.

Are you proposing spending the #14 pick on a QB?

If Rodgers hasn't/doesn't completely recover from his injury, will a rookie save the season?

Could Rodgers suffer another injury that could end his career early?

If Rodgers does recover and has "6 or more good years", what do you propose to do with this newly drafted QB?

 

[BrokenArrow]

We do NOT need a first round QB now. Take one in the 2nd or 3rd round. We need a good edge pass rusher NOW. Character issues aside, we would be absolute fools not to take Key if he's there at #14.

 

[pfcmsh]

Remember, Favre wasn't "traded" because he wasn't a very good football player or at the end of the line. There were other reasons behind Rogers being drafted and taking over for Favre.

Are you proposing spending the #14 pick on a QB?

If Rodgers hasn't/doesn't completely recover from his injury, will a rookie save the season?

Could Rodgers suffer another injury that could end his career early?

If Rodgers does recover and has "6 or more good years", what do you propose to do with this newly drafted QB?

Your point is good about the reason we went to Rogers from Favre.

I think a first or 2nd round qb pick is a good move in 2018.

No, a rookie won't save the season, a full team of 53 will. I expect Rogers to play the whole season.

Yes, Rogers could suffer a career ending or just an injury. We have to begin to get ready.

I don't expect Rogers to play 6 more years. His replacement will take at least 2 years in our way of developing.

 

[El Guapo]

Favre had been publicly broadcasting for years that he was mulling retirement. THAT is what induced Thompson to pull the trigger on a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Rodgers only broadcast has been his increasing number of injuries, but I don't think this is on the level of Favre.

I remember back when Favre kept teasing with retirement. One of the Packers sportwriters did a pretty good analysis of whether teams had more success drafting a HOF quarterback's replacement, or just trading for/drafting one when the QB departed. The sportswriter concluded that there was no proven solution. Here are some similar articles:

The success/failure teams have experienced replacing HOF quarterbacks:
http://www.espn.com/blog/nfcnorth/p...-rodgers-packers-accomplished-rare-succession

A good look at the lack of success teams have had replacing their elite QBs:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/...n-gets-ugly/md3rQyaPe2jebJIIKXRQTP/story.html

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Take a look at how one of the better GM's has dealt with having Tom Brady as his QB. Brady was drafted in 2000. 14 drafts later, in 2014, Belichick finally pulled the trigger and used a 2nd round pick on Garoppolo. 3 years later, JG is shipped off to San Fran for a 2nd round pick. In between 2000 and 2014 Belichick took a few shots at QB's, but besides Mallett in the 2011 3rd round, didn't waste a lot of draft resources on the position.

Saints, pretty much the same thing with Drew Brees entrenched as their starter.

Chargers and Phillip Rivers, ditto.

If we didn't have other more pressing needs, I could possibly see having the luxury of taking a QB high, but that doesn't seem to be the case, nor the time IMO.

 

[BrokenArrow]

I hope Aaron plays 6 more years, but can he COMPLETELY recover from a clavicle that required 13 screws to repair? He is 34 years old guys!!

Yes, he can and he will. The 13 screws were necessarily required. They were an option he chose that would allow him to return ASAP. Come training camp that clavicle will be better than 100%.

 

[VegasPacker]

We do NOT need a first round QB now. Take one in the 2nd or 3rd round. We need a good edge pass rusher NOW. Character issues aside, we would be absolute fools not to take Key if he's there at #14.

I would take Harold Landry every day of the week and twice on Sunday over Key and his issues. Landry is built to shed blocks and get to the QB.

But my top choices for our 1st rounder are:
Minkah Fitzpatrick - CB
Mike McGlinchey - OT
Harold Landry - OLB
Roquan Smith - ILB

2nd round:
Troy Fumagalli - TE

 

[El Guapo]

When you have a HOF quarterback, you keep drafting mid-to-low round QBs in order to develop them. Wolf did a good job of this with a long list of backups that went on to start elsewhere: Mark Brunnell, Aaron Brooks, Matt Hasselbeck, TJ Rubley, Ty Detmer.... Either Thompson hasn't had the same success drafting or McCarthy's QB school should lose its accreditation. I still think that it's the right path versus spending big on QB before you need it.

* TJ Rubley was tossed in their so that some of the young bucks on this forum could learn about his legacy

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

When you have a HOF quarterback, you keep drafting mid-to-low round QBs in order to develop them. Wolf did a good job of this with a long list of backups that went on to start elsewhere: Mark Brunnell, Aaron Brooks, Matt Hasselbeck, TJ Rubley, Ty Detmer.... Either Thompson hasn't had the same success drafting or McCarthy's QB school should lose its accreditation. I still think that it's the right path versus spending big on QB before you need it.

* TJ Rubley was tossed in their so that some of the young bucks on this forum could learn about his legacy

Rubley wasn't even a draft pick of the Packers. He was chosen in the 9th round by the Rams in 1992.

Really you can't use this same comparison until the 1993 draft and beyond, since Favre wasn't a known quantity until 1992. So that eliminates Detmer. Brunell (1993) was taken in the 3rd round following Favre's becoming the starter. I don't think Wolf was looking for a starter, but a back up in Brunell. After that you have Wolf using late round picks on flyers and potential #2 QB's.(Barker, Wacholtz, McAda, Hasselbeck, Brooks, Nall). With Brooks and Hasselbeck playing well enough to get jobs elsewhere.

I highly doubt at any point in time, besides maybe the Brunell pick (not 100% sold on Favre yet), was Wolf looking for Favre's replacement. People are talking about finding Rodgers replacement in this draft. I still don't see the need or the precedent by Wolf or other GM's to use a high pick on replacing a FHOF QB who could very well play for another 6+ years. If people are wanting to draft a QB to replace Hundley in 2019, I sort of understand that, but would prefer a FA for that task.

 

[OldSchool101]

I'd prefer both. Get a Veteran backup QB and then if a draft QB slips significantly below his grade go after one. The one exception is at #14, I would not use that on a QB

In the meantime it's always smart to draft a second or third day developmental QB because of the value the QB position holds. Especially in a year where we have a beaucoup number of draft picks

 

[PackAttack12]

I'd prefer both. Get a Veteran backup QB and then if a draft QB slips significantly below his grade go after one. The one exception is at #14, I would not use that on a QB

In the meantime it's always smart to draft a second or third day developmental QB because of the value the QB position holds. Especially in a year where we have a beaucoup number of draft picks

Allocate cap resources AND draft resources to acquire two quarterbacks who will not supplant Rodgers.....

I am really struggling to determine the logic in this.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Allocate cap resources AND draft resources to acquire two quarterbacks who will not supplant Rodgers.....

I am really struggling to determine the logic in this.

and don't forget.....trade Hundly for a couple of first rounders

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'd prefer both. Get a Veteran backup QB and then if a draft QB slips significantly below his grade go after one. The one exception is at #14, I would not use that on a QB

In the meantime it's always smart to draft a second or third day developmental QB because of the value the QB position holds. Especially in a year where we have a beaucoup number of draft picks

This is the most important part of your post. The "value" the QB position holds. What value is there in most 4th round or later picks at QB? It's a guy who may end up eating up a roster spot and never see a meaningful snap. As well as a guy who may not be ready for a few years, if that meaningful snap does all of a sudden happen. To me the backup QB position might be THE most important backup position on the team. Have some in it that is ready to go, opening day.