I wonder how much time the Packers are expecting to play in base? It's a passing league.

DarkaneRules;350530I wonder how much time the Packers are expecting to play in base? It's a passing league.

I thought this too. But if Clark helps you win first down and second down then he is also helping your sub-packages indirectly.

Unfortunately, I believe GB had a terrible third down defense (and offense) last year.

warhawk;350528Did you ever ask yourself the question why 9 of 10 DL you felt were better are still on the board and only Butler is gone from the overall list you gave? The Packers aren't the only one's that passed on these guys.
They all did. No denying these are all good players and if they get picked by the right team with a scheme that fits their style they will be fine. That doesn't mean they would have had the same success with the Packers. Obviously Clark was that guy for the Pack at 27.

Like always, time will tell, so we wait and see.

Hey, look at my first sentence.


I said, "Obviously, I have no clue."

I didn't say I knew better.
I said I really saw things differently.
*My* conclusion is that *I* was clueless.

Even if I was correct on Nick Perry.
:)

As the day has gone by no one has mentioned that the last time GB drafted a DT w the last name of Clark in the 1st round it didn't work out very well.

wpr;350537As the day has gone by no one has mentioned that the last time GB drafted a DT w the last name of Clark in the 1st round it didn't work out very well.

Probably because that was 35 years ago and was two years prior to the Packers Director-Football Operations even being born yet, lol. Also, wasn't he a defensive end? Hell, Kenny Clark wasn't even born for another 15 years after that pick! lol

Zero2Cool;350540Probably because that was 35 years ago and was two years prior to the Packers Director-Football Operations even being born yet, lol. Also, wasn't he a defensive end? Hell, Kenny Clark wasn't even born for another 15 years after that pick! lol

Wiki has Bruce listed as a DT so it must be right. [wink]
I thought he was a DE.

Edit- the link in your story calls Bruce a DE. The link to the 1980 draft results list him as a DT.

wpr;350541Wiki has Bruce listed as a DT so it must be right. [wink]
I thought he was a DE.

Edit- the link in your story calls Bruce a DE. The link to the 1980 draft results list him as a DT.

Trust PackersHome
[laugh]

Wade;350535Hey, look at my first sentence.


I said, "Obviously, I have no clue."

I didn't say I knew better.
I said I really saw things differently.
*My* conclusion is that *I* was clueless.

Even if I was correct on Nick Perry.
:)

When it comes to Ted who isn't clueless? It did take most of the 10 to pick though and I bet there was a whole lot going on with all the different options they had. I give TT credit for sticking with the plan and taking the guy highest on the list. Even if it's a hell of a list.

I haven't seen that many good players available that late since I can remember.

warhawk;350543I haven't seen that many good players available that late since I can remember.

I enjoyed the fact so many of these draft "experts" projected all these guys to be 1st rounders, yet they're still on the board.
Kinda shows you that these guys are getting paid ridiculous amounts for what is basically a guessing game.

I'm OK with the pick, just can't shake the feeling of being vaguely disappointed.
I felt there were a number of guys of close/similar capability available at the position, so we could have traded down and gotten one later.
I feel we probably could have traded, since the team before us and the team after us both traded back.


I don't think there was any way we were taking Jack in the first round (not after the draft-an-injured-Justin-Harrell-in-the-first-round debacle).
I think TT would be gun shy of having lightning strike twice.