In other words, which draft picks didn't see the field... kinda surprised they left LB Hopper off the list.

beast;468802In other words, which draft picks didn't see the field... kinda surprised they left LB Hopper off the list.

Right? Just the lowest of low hanging fruit.

Mucky Tundra;468803Right? Just the lowest of low hanging fruit.

Yeah, I'll do a little write up, on 3 players that I think our more likely to play more, than Lloyd, Monk and Oladapo.

1) What I expected the roster to have, is a write up on whom they expected to take some of Watson snaps, as he'll likely still be rehabbing his injury to start the season.

So my #1, and maybe a bit of a surprise, is: TE Musgrave. First off, Musgrave might play more simply because he was injured early last season, and if the Packers trust Musgrave (which is not a sure thing, as his playing time seemed to be declining even before injury) but if the Packers trust Musgrave, they potentially might run a lot more 2 TE sets next year.

Musgrave, when he's at his best, has the size and the straight line speed to threaten the seam and the deep ball action.


2) If we're going with rookies OL going into their 2nd year, then it's got to be OL Morgan.

Yes, Myers is a FA, but sounded like they wanted to re-sign him, and the Packers actions showed that they had both Jenkins and Rhyan ahead at Center over Monk, as they got moved their first when injuries hit, opening up OG, where Morgan got some starting time at.

Rhyan was better than Morgan, but it's was fairly close, if Morgan is able to make more improvement going into his 2nd year than Rhyan into his 4th year, then Morgan potential could be an outright starter.

Also, I don't want to dive too deeply into this, as it PROBABLY was just a throw away comment, but I've been wrong too often thinking that end of the year comments were just throw away comments, and for the send of the year statements actually become true, so I think it's worth mentioning.

Either Gute or LaFleur comments, made a very subtle comment, which made me think they were considering putting Tom at LT next year. Again, this could be a throw away comment, and maybe they do consider it, and decide against it.

But this surprised me, as Tom seems more like a natural RT and Walker more like a natural LT. The only ways this makes sense to me, is that EITHER they KNOW they're going to re-sign Tom, and they're unsure if they're going to re-sign Walker, AND/OR they want Walker and Morgan to compete at RT. Hoping Morgan can take over at RT, either this year, or after we lose Walker.


3) Defense is sooo easy... both rookies Safeties were injured at times last year, so they should be playing more, Van Ness talent, in theory should be developing more and he should play more, CB Valentine seems to earn the starting position mid-season and he should be playing more, there are SO MANY directions to go on defense...

Why go with the 5th Safety? Yeah, he might become the 4th Safety, but unless there is injuries, I don't believe he'll be in the top 3 Safeties. Of course, with Bullard playing nickel, they do play 3 Safeties.

But I'll go with I'll go with LB Cooper, who was #4 LB on snap counts, only ahead of follow rookie LB Hooper who only had 18 defensive snaps, and he himself is a candidate for potential having more snaps.

Packers have been keeping 5 LBs on the roster, and McDuffie and Wilson, who are #2 and #3 in LB snap counts, are currently FAs. They aren't expected to be the most expensive, so the Packers potential could easily just re-sign them.

But I think to everyone's eyes, we could all see that Cooper was looking like he physically could potentially be the best LB in the entire team, and if he earns the coaches trust and stays healthy, he potentially could lead the LBs in snap counts next year.

I think the big question here, is why wasn't Cooper able to earn the coaches trust and get on the field much much sooner? And whatever that reason, will he have it corrected this coming season?