PDA

View Full Version : Question about Green Bay's Pick at 16


Xiomera
03-31-2007, 01:01 PM
Let's assume Green Bay does not trade up or down, and that Lynch and Peterson are off the board.

Do you guys think Green Bay will take Greg Olsen at 16? Or are you more focused on a WR at this point?

I am making a mock, and am so tempted to put Robert Meachem to the Packers at 16.

Thoughts?

GB12
03-31-2007, 01:05 PM
I answed you in the discussion thread.


I'm really thinking that we wouldn't do either. I really don't want a TE in the first round. We can get someone later in the draft and TT should be able to find one. Is it a need, yes. Is it a need that warrents the #16 pick, no. Going in with Franks, Lee, and a 2-5 round TE would be fine. i'd rather get more value in the first.

As for WR, we talk a lot about getting Moss, which I would love to happen, but if we don't I'm not sure we go WR in the first. Most of the players I like that were in our range earlier have moved up(Landry, Okoye, etc.). If we could get either of those two or Lynch that would be the pick. If not the next best thing would be to move down in the mid 20s and get Griffin while picking up more picks. If that's not possible I guess Nelson, eventhough i'm not a fan. Mrachem would be next followed by Olsen. In no way do I want Ginn.


Just my quick thoughts.

Xiomera
03-31-2007, 01:08 PM
I saw that now. Thanks

I think Green Bay has to go offense in round one. I agree that Ginn is not a good choice for them. I can just imagine Favre shaking his head in disbelief as Ginn continually messes up his routes.

I think Olsen is a good pick, but I can see why you would want to go in another direction.

I did a co-mock with Scotty D a week ago and we had GB taking Olsen in the first, and Antonio Pittman in the 2nd . . . what do you guys think of this?

princefielder28
03-31-2007, 01:10 PM
I saw that now. Thanks

I think Green Bay has to go offense in round one. I agree that Ginn is not a good choice for them. I can just imagine Favre shaking his head in disbelief as Ginn continually messes up his routes.

I think Olsen is a good pick, but I can see why you would want to go in another direction.

I did a co-mock with Scotty D a week ago and we had GB taking Olsen in the first, and Antonio Pittman in the 2nd . . . what do you guys think of this?

Not a big fan of Antonio Pittman, I would prefer Tony Hunt. One person I am very intrigued by in round 2, even though it may be a reach, is WR Aundrae Allison.

Xiomera
03-31-2007, 01:19 PM
Not a big fan of Antonio Pittman, I would prefer Tony Hunt. One person I am very intrigued by in round 2, even though it may be a reach, is WR Aundrae Allison.

Didn't Hunt run a slow 40 time? I think the middle of round 2 might be a reach for him.

If you want a 2nd round receiver, then who do you take in round one? Reggie Nelson?

princefielder28
03-31-2007, 01:20 PM
Didn't Hunt run a slow 40 time? I think the middle of round 2 might be a reach for him.

If you want a 2nd round receiver, then who do you take in round one? Reggie Nelson?

Probably and then RB in round 3

neko4
03-31-2007, 01:22 PM
Didn't Hunt run a slow 40 time? I think the middle of round 2 might be a reach for him.

If you want a 2nd round receiver, then who do you take in round one? Reggie Nelson?

We're not drafting him to play track
I would like Olsen in the 1st or Nelson, WR would only be a 3rd option for me

GB12
03-31-2007, 01:28 PM
I saw that now. Thanks

I think Green Bay has to go offense in round one. I agree that Ginn is not a good choice for them. I can just imagine Favre shaking his head in disbelief as Ginn continually messes up his routes.

I think Olsen is a good pick, but I can see why you would want to go in another direction.

I did a co-mock with Scotty D a week ago and we had GB taking Olsen in the first, and Antonio Pittman in the 2nd . . . what do you guys think of this?

I agree that going offense would be better, even though I listed like all defense. The thing is there aren't many offensive players that I like around our pick. There is Lynch but if he is gone all that is left for first round offense is Olsen and WRs.

After RB there is no position that needs an upgrade more than the others. S, WR, TE and DT would be the other positions that we could go. Which one I'm not sure of.

With safety we have Manual who is not as bad as we make him seem and he could be a starter again. Behind him we have Underwood who as you might have guessed I absolutely love. I would really like to give him a chance and think he could be a starter if not this year in the future. There are few safeties I would want in the draft. Landry I would take right away if given the chance. Griffin with the trade down would be ok also. Nelson I don't like but him and Merriwether(not in the first) could be considered but I'd rather not. After that there is no safety I would draft.

At WR we do have Driver and Jennings as our 1 and 2. I would prefer to not use it for a guy to come and be a #3. 3rd WRs can be found in later rounds.

TE is a need but I've already explained why I don't want one.

DT while not a huge need could help out the defense. The only reason I put this was for Okoye, although he looks to be more of a sure thing to be gone than Lynch. I would consider Tyler at the appropriate pick though that looks to be early second. Williams and Cole can combine to make the side next to Pickett, So as you see there aren't many options to go.

GB12
03-31-2007, 01:31 PM
Didn't Hunt run a slow 40 time? I think the middle of round 2 might be a reach for him.

If you want a 2nd round receiver, then who do you take in round one? Reggie Nelson?

For WR I want Meachem then Bowe then Jarret. I don't like Nelson but he might be the option we are stuck with. I'm starting to warm up to him a bit, but still far from my first choice.

Xiomera
03-31-2007, 01:32 PM
Love it or hate it, I am strongly considering Robert Meachem to the Packers in my next mock. Reggie Nelson and Greg Olsen are also available, but I just can't see them going defense in round one (especially since Nelson is supposedly slipping a bit). Olsen makes a lot of sense for GB, but you guys seem to be against it.

Toss Up: Greg Olsen or Robert Meachem at 16? All things aside, just answer the question.

GB12
03-31-2007, 01:35 PM
Love it or hate it, I am strongly considering Robert Meachem to the Packers in my next mock. Reggie Nelson and Greg Olsen are also available, but I just can't see them going defense in round one (especially since Nelson is supposedly slipping a bit). Olsen makes a lot of sense for GB, but you guys seem to be against it.

Toss Up: Greg Olsen or Robert Meachem at 16? All things aside, just answer the question.

There are actually quite a few that like Olsen in the first. I''m not one of them though.

Meachem

Xiomera
03-31-2007, 01:49 PM
I tend to think that Favre would love to have a stud TE again. He hasn't had one since Mark Chmura . . . except maybe one year by Bubba Franks . . .

princefielder28
03-31-2007, 02:12 PM
Love it or hate it, I am strongly considering Robert Meachem to the Packers in my next mock. Reggie Nelson and Greg Olsen are also available, but I just can't see them going defense in round one (especially since Nelson is supposedly slipping a bit). Olsen makes a lot of sense for GB, but you guys seem to be against it.

Toss Up: Greg Olsen or Robert Meachem at 16? All things aside, just answer the question.

Greg Olsen runs a 40 in the 4.4s and with a LB covering him he could make some big plays compare to a rookie wideout against a corner

neko4
03-31-2007, 02:15 PM
Love it or hate it, I am strongly considering Robert Meachem to the Packers in my next mock. Reggie Nelson and Greg Olsen are also available, but I just can't see them going defense in round one (especially since Nelson is supposedly slipping a bit). Olsen makes a lot of sense for GB, but you guys seem to be against it.

Toss Up: Greg Olsen or Robert Meachem at 16? All things aside, just answer the question.

Olsen
You said it yourself, Favre likes his TE's. TE's also develop faster.

bearsfan_51
03-31-2007, 02:20 PM
I've seen numerous places that they are focusing more on floor, rather than ceiling players. This makes me think they'll stay away from projects like Ginn and Olsen. I still think secondary will be the pick if they don't look at runningback and will take a guy like Leon Hall (though I think Hall will slip into the top 10 to the suprise of many), Darrelle Revis (who I've got at 13 to St.Louis), Reggie Nelson (a little high IMO), or Chris Houston. With all that said, I think Lynch is the pick.

neko4
03-31-2007, 02:24 PM
I've seen numerous places that they are focusing more on floor, rather than ceiling players. This makes me think they'll stay away from projects like Ginn and Olsen. I still think secondary will be the pick if they don't look at runningback and will take a guy like Leon Hall (though I think Hall will slip into the top 10 to the suprise of many), Darrelle Revis (who I've got at 13 to St.Louis), Reggie Nelson (a little high IMO), or Chris Houston. With all that said, I think Lynch is the pick.

CB in the first would be stupid. We just signed a guy who will compete to be #3(Frank Walker) w/ Patrick Dendy. Woodson and Harris played great this year. CB shouldnt show up till early day 2

princefielder28
03-31-2007, 02:24 PM
I've seen numerous places that they are focusing more on floor, rather than ceiling players. This makes me think they'll stay away from projects like Ginn and Olsen. I still think secondary will be the pick if they don't look at runningback and will take a guy like Leon Hall (though I think Hall will slip into the top 10 to the suprise of many), Darrelle Revis (who I've got at 13 to St.Louis), Reggie Nelson (a little high IMO), or Chris Houston. With all that said, I think Lynch is the pick.

If they could secondary it would be a safety because there is no reason to take a 1st round corner with Harris and Woodson. I really don't know where you think Greg Olsen is a project b/c he's always had the physical ability but the QB play at Miami has absolutely sucked since he had gotten there. I would go Olsen and help out that offense.

Jim Jim
03-31-2007, 03:07 PM
Dwayne Jarrett will be the pick then, I believe.

Vince Lombardi
03-31-2007, 03:12 PM
Love it or hate it, I am strongly considering Robert Meachem to the Packers in my next mock. Reggie Nelson and Greg Olsen are also available, but I just can't see them going defense in round one (especially since Nelson is supposedly slipping a bit). Olsen makes a lot of sense for GB, but you guys seem to be against it.

Toss Up: Greg Olsen or Robert Meachem at 16? All things aside, just answer the question.

Olsen easily. We're not as bad at WR as everybody makes us out to be, and I don't think it's something we need to address in the 1st. Basically all we need is a speed guy to stretch the defense.

I think Olsen is pretty much on par with the Miami TE's that have come out recently and would make the biggest impact on our offense. I actually think he may be a bit underrated because of the terrible QB's he played with. His athleticism, speed, and hands are right their with Shockey & Winslow and he may even be a better blocker than both of them.

This is all if Lynch and Landry are off the board of course....

Jim Jim
03-31-2007, 03:14 PM
Olsen easily. We're not as bad at WR as everybody makes us out to be, and I don't think it's something we need to address in the 1st. Basically all we need is a speed guy to stretch the defense.

I think Olsen is pretty much on par with the Miami TE's that have come out recently and would make the biggest impact on our offense. I actually think he may be a bit underrated because of the terrible QB's he played with. His athleticism, speed, and hands are right their with Shockey & Winslow and he may even be a better blocker than both of them.

This is all if Lynch and Landry are of the board of course....

I have read nowhere where Green Bay is interested in Olsen, and you have to remember that Green Bay has already had a issue with Olsen's agent with another receiving threat.

jackalope
03-31-2007, 07:18 PM
I would want Olsen at 16 if Lynch and Landry are gone. I would rather not take a receiver in the first, unless we trade down.

princefielder28
03-31-2007, 07:19 PM
I would want Olsen at 16 if Lynch and Landry are gone. I would rather not take a receiver in the first, unless we trade down.

I feel the same way! :)

bearsfan_51
03-31-2007, 07:33 PM
If they could secondary it would be a safety because there is no reason to take a 1st round corner with Harris and Woodson. I really don't know where you think Greg Olsen is a project b/c he's always had the physical ability but the QB play at Miami has absolutely sucked since he had gotten there. I would go Olsen and help out that offense.
Both guys are over 30. Corners are not long for this world. Not to mention that Woodson probably projects to safety better.

As for Frank Walker (previous post) I'd answer that but I haven't gotten up off the floor from laughing yet.

Olsen is a project because what is he? He's not a pure tight-end and I think anyone that tries to use him as such will do so at their own peril. It's actually unfortunate (well not for me cause I don't like the Packers) that they got rid of David Martin because he would be a good person to pair with Olsen. I don't think he can block in the box and they will need to find creative ways to get him off the line because most DE's could probably knock him on his ass as soon as the play starts.

neko4
03-31-2007, 07:36 PM
Im hopeing we dont use Olsen to block and keep Bubba for that reason. Im not saying we wont draft a CB, but I think it can wait till day 2.

princefielder28
03-31-2007, 07:41 PM
Im hopeing we dont use Olsen to block and keep Bubba for that reason. Im not saying we wont draft a CB, but I think it can wait till day 2.

If we draft Olsen it would be for him to be an intrigual part of the passing game

johbur
03-31-2007, 08:05 PM
I am an Olsen fan. He posted solid numbers in college with a mediocre QB. He's not a great blocker, but it's easier to teach blocking than it is to teach speed and catching, which Olsen does well. I like Olsen at #16 a lot, though I've seen plenty of mocks where he goes a couple selections in front of the Packers. A number of Packers fans think that Bubba and crew can get better, which is a good thought as the TE spot was terrible last year so getting better likely just due to default.

I am not for any of this crop of WRs at 16 anymore, unless it's CJ. If they could trade down and get Bowe or Jarrett, fine. I think WR is deep enough that they could get some guys in later rounds, which TT has a proven track record of doing.

I think the value is better for a safety, or see if a CB fell. Laron Landry and Reggie Nelson are solid (or steals and Landry probably won't be there). Okoye likely to not be there. I'm not really all that excited about the middle selections for the Packers with regards to value at #16. I also like Adam Carriker to solidify the line, but he could be gone as well.

My mock posted in the Team Mocks:
Round One:
R1: Greg Olsen, Tight End, Miami
R2: Antonio Pittman, Running Back, Ohio St.
R3: John Wendling, Safety, Wyoming
R4: Jacoby Jones, Wide Receiver, Lane
R5: Travarous Bain, Corner Back, Hampton
R6: Andy Alleman, Offensive Guard, Akron
R7: Courtney Brown, Corner Back, Cal Poly
R7: Legedu Naanee, Wide Receiver, Boise St.
R7: Isaiah Stanback, Quarter Back (WR), Washington

So there's a Packers mock with Olsen and Pittman, filling need areas with players of good value.

bearsfan_51
03-31-2007, 08:10 PM
If the Packers take Antonio Pittman I will shake my fist vigorously in the air. You already took A.J Hawk. Stop taking all my favorite Buckeyes!! Take Ted Ginn Jr. Hell take Troy Smith.

GB12
03-31-2007, 09:19 PM
Both guys are over 30. Corners are not long for this world. Not to mention that Woodson probably projects to safety better.

As for Frank Walker (previous post) I'd answer that but I haven't gotten up off the floor from laughing yet.

Olsen is a project because what is he? He's not a pure tight-end and I think anyone that tries to use him as such will do so at their own peril. It's actually unfortunate (well not for me cause I don't like the Packers) that they got rid of David Martin because he would be a good person to pair with Olsen. I don't think he can block in the box and they will need to find creative ways to get him off the line because most DE's could probably knock him on his ass as soon as the play starts.


Are you saying that martin can block? Because if he can i have not seen it.

princefielder28
03-31-2007, 09:23 PM
Are you saying that martin can block? Because if he can i have not seen it.

I'm blind to it too

ny10804
03-31-2007, 09:31 PM
If the Packers take Antonio Pittman I will shake my fist vigorously in the air. You already took A.J Hawk. Stop taking all my favorite Buckeyes!! Take Ted Ginn Jr. Hell take Troy Smith.


OR, become a Packer fan.

PACKmanN
03-31-2007, 09:45 PM
lol and when i was the frist person to put Olsen in the frist for the packers, everyone thought it was too early for him, i guess i was wrong huh, lol.

princefielder28
03-31-2007, 09:47 PM
lol and when i was the frist person to put Olsen in the frist for the packers, everyone thought it was too early for him, i guess i was wrong huh, lol.

If you were going off his college performance then I guess there's a reason for people to laugh but following the combine there was no question that he belongs in round 1

Jim Jim
03-31-2007, 10:15 PM
TT usually picks guys with good production, Olsen has a lot of potential but his agent and lack of production will not make him the pick for the Packers.

cuzifelt1ikeit
04-01-2007, 09:27 AM
i hope we dont take olsen in the first. what a waste

M1Koter
04-01-2007, 10:55 AM
lol and when i was the frist person to put Olsen in the frist for the packers, everyone thought it was too early for him, i guess i was wrong huh, lol.

it still is

someone447
04-01-2007, 12:24 PM
OR, become a Packer fan.

He already secretly is.

neko4
04-01-2007, 12:39 PM
i hope we dont take olsen in the first. what a waste

Yeah it would be a terrible waste considering Bubba dropped a trillion passes

cuzifelt1ikeit
04-01-2007, 01:12 PM
Yeah it would be a terrible waste considering Bubba dropped a trillion passes
the guy was a second round pick until he ran a 4.4 fourty. so tell me, how does someone go from 32+ to 16? straight line speed in shorts is WAY different then football speed. the fourty is the most overrated statistic come draft time. and that coming from you just makes it even more laughable, some of the stuff you say is stupid, theres other tight ends that we can get for better value, taking olsen at 16 is a terrible choice, if we trade down then maybe

princefielder28
04-01-2007, 02:54 PM
the guy was a second round pick until he ran a 4.4 fourty. so tell me, how does someone go from 32+ to 16? straight line speed in shorts is WAY different then football speed. the fourty is the most overrated statistic come draft time. and that coming from you just makes it even more laughable, some of the stuff you say is stupid, theres other tight ends that we can get for better value, taking olsen at 16 is a terrible choice, if we trade down then maybe

Greg Olsen had to prove he had the physical skills b/c GMs knew that the QB sucked and they couldn't get him the ball

cuzifelt1ikeit
04-01-2007, 03:27 PM
Greg Olsen had to prove he had the physical skills b/c GMs knew that the QB sucked and they couldn't get him the ball
part of the skillset doesnt depend on the qb. such as pass and run blocking as well as route running. not to mention hands

princefielder28
04-01-2007, 03:29 PM
part of the skillset doesnt depend on the qb. such as pass and run blocking as well as route running. not to mention hands

GMs had no clue how good his hands were b/c he never got the ball and when he did he made plays. He is a 1st round talent.

cuzifelt1ikeit
04-01-2007, 03:51 PM
GMs had no clue how good his hands were b/c he never got the ball and when he did he made plays. He is a 1st round talent.
im just not sold. i think he is shining because of the class this year

princefielder28
04-01-2007, 03:54 PM
im just not sold. i think he is shining because of the class this year

Thats fine! Thats your opinion and I can understand why you feel that way