Divisional Round Mock

[SuperPacker]

Originally Posted by Robcards

How is that even remotely close to the same thing? Charles was an established RB before he got injured and Rodgers was never injured so how does that even come close to what I said?

Before Sherrod went down, was he a starting LT and showing promise? No. So how is it unreasonable for the packers take a LT in the first? Keeping in mind LTs aren't exactly easy to find in later rounds like the other 4 oline positions

*sigh*

You're obviously incapable of understanding logic, so i'll just stop arguing this.

[Robcards]

Originally Posted by SuperPacker

*sigh*

You're obviously incapable of understanding logic, so i'll just stop arguing this.

LOL I'm the one incapable of understanding logic? I say that it doesn't bode well for a player who struggles with injuries and get on the field the first 2 years of his career and you compare that to jamaal Charles and Aaron Rodgers. What the hell man at least use mikel leshoure or someone a little closer.

[Robcards]

How about this argument. Sherrod is trash. How about that? Would you prefer to debate that than his injury? Come on man you can't be this obtuse. Teams don't say 'let's not draft this position in the first because we did that 2 years ago and he hasn't worked out yet but he could still'. I understand you're clinging on to hope that he's not a bust, but to say him being on the roster = no OT in the first for the pack is absurd.

[SuperPacker]

Originally Posted by Robcards

LOL I'm the one incapable of understanding logic? I say that it doesn't bode well for a player who struggles with injuries and get on the field the first 2 years of his career and you compare that to jamaal Charles and Aaron Rodgers. What the hell man at least use mikel leshoure or someone a little closer.

Originally Posted by Robcards

How about this argument. Sherrod is trash. How about that? Would you prefer to debate that than his injury? Come on man you can't be this obtuse. Teams don't say 'let's not draft this position in the first because we did that 2 years ago and he hasn't worked out yet but he could still'. I understand you're clinging on to hope that he's not a bust, but to say him being on the roster = no OT in the first for the pack is absurd.

He doesn't struggle with injuries. Wtf are you talking about? He's had one injury in his NFL career. That doesn't not mean he 'struggles with injuries'.

Well that argument would have no basis, as you haven't seen him play...

I'm not clinging onto the hope that he isn't a bust. He isn't. His first year he sat behind Chad Clifton, his second he was injured. He would be a bust if he has been constantly injured eg. Justin Harrell or has just played terrible. He hasn't done either.

Lets just say we drafted Sherrod last season, Clifton stayed another year and then Sherrod sat behind him for the whole year this season. Would you then be drafting an OT to the Packers? No, because we drafted him knowing he would be sat behind Clifton and then taking over once he retired. The only difference in that scenario is that he didn't get injured, but that shouldn't change anything, because players come back from injuries...

[Robcards]

Originally Posted by SuperPacker

He doesn't struggle with injuries. Wtf are you talking about? He's had one injury in his NFL career. That doesn't not mean he 'struggles with injuries'.

Well that argument would have no basis, as you haven't seen him play...

I'm not clinging onto the hope that he isn't a bust. He isn't. His first year he sat behind Chad Clifton, his second he was injured. He would be a bust if he has been constantly injured eg. Justin Harrell or has just played terrible. He hasn't done either.

Lets just say we drafted Sherrod last season, Clifton stayed another year and then Sherrod sat behind him for the whole year this season. Would you then be drafting an OT to the Packers? No, because we drafted him knowing he would be sat behind Clifton and then taking over once he retired. The only difference in that scenario is that he didn't get injured, but that shouldn't change anything, because players come back from injuries...

Ok man everyone in the nfl is Adrian Peterson, especially 320 pound linemen I'm sure he'll be a stud next year and the packers don't need to address LT at all.

Sarcasm aside, in your mind what positions are feasible for the Packers to draft in the first round? Looking at their roster they have good young talent or big money vets at most positions, yet when I mock a position they don't have that in like G/C in my last mock (this isn't my most recent btw not sure who bumped this) I get told no.

[SuperPacker]

Originally Posted by Robcards

Ok man everyone in the nfl is Adrian Peterson, especially 320 pound linemen I'm sure he'll be a stud next year and the packers don't need to address LT at all.

Sarcasm aside, in your mind what positions are feasible for the Packers to draft in the first round? Looking at their roster they have good young talent or big money vets at most positions, yet when I mock a position they don't have that in like G/C in my last mock (this isn't my most recent btw not sure who bumped this) I get told no.

Tell me where I said he was going to be a stud. Please.

I never said anything like that, my point was that we should give him a chance to prove himself, which is kind of different too "Derek Sherrod is a stud".

[Robcards]

Originally Posted by SuperPacker

Tell me where I said he was going to be a stud. Please.

I never said anything like that, my point was that we should give him a chance to prove himself, which is kind of different too "Derek Sherrod is a stud".

When you said the packers won't draft a LT first round.

You didn't answer my question about who the Packers will draft in the first

[SuperPacker]

Originally Posted by Robcards

When you said the packers won't draft a LT first round.

You didn't answer my question about who the Packers will draft in the first

Again, my reasoning for us not drafting a OT was that we should give Sherrod a chance, not that he is a stud.

If I knew the answer to that question I probably would've started with that, instead of telling you why I don't think we should draft an OT in the first round.

[Robcards]

Originally Posted by SuperPacker

Again, my reasoning for us not drafting a OT was that we should give Sherrod a chance, not that he is a stud.

If I knew the answer to that question I probably would've started with that, instead of telling you why I don't think we should draft an OT in the first round.

Alright then. Well my logic is this. They went overboard drafting defense last year, so they have tons of young talent on that side of the ball, particularly Perry Worthy and Hayward, and to a lesser extent Daniels. There aren't really any RBs worthy of that late 1st round pick this year, although some may emerge through the evaluation process, and that is their one clear need. I also don't think its a stretch to assume that they will try to keep Aaron Rodgers happy and if he wants better protection they will address the o-line first and foremost this year, as that was a big weakness of theirs this season (I am aware some of that is injury related, but the point stands). Whether its interior or LT or both in the 1st 2 rounds, I just don't see how that isn't the focus of their early selections. The round a guy was selected shouldn't dictate how much of a chance he gets, and they have solid young talent pretty much everywhere. Aside from o-line, S and RB are really the only spots I could see them going in the 1st.

[SuperPacker]

Originally Posted by Robcards

Alright then. Well my logic is this. They went overboard drafting defense last year, so they have tons of young talent on that side of the ball, particularly Perry Worthy and Hayward, and to a lesser extent Daniels. There aren't really any RBs worthy of that late 1st round pick this year, although some may emerge through the evaluation process, and that is their one clear need. I also don't think its a stretch to assume that they will try to keep Aaron Rodgers happy and if he wants better protection they will address the o-line first and foremost this year, as that was a big weakness of theirs this season (I am aware some of that is injury related, but the point stands). Whether its interior or LT or both in the 1st 2 rounds, I just don't see how that isn't the focus of their early selections. The round a guy was selected shouldn't dictate how much of a chance he gets, and they have solid young talent pretty much everywhere. Aside from o-line, S and RB are really the only spots I could see them going in the 1st.

If OT is a need, why is OLB not a need? We picked Perry in the first last year, he didn't play that well and then got injured for the year. Clearly you aren't using this 'logic' of yours very well.

[Robcards]

Originally Posted by SuperPacker

If OT is a need, why is OLB not a need? We picked Perry in the first last year, he didn't play that well and then got injured for the year. Clearly you aren't using this 'logic' of yours very well.

It might very well be a need, next year. Don't see how that goes against what I've said. He also wasn't expected to be a star right away transitioning to a 3-4 OLB so it's quite a bit different in that regard as well.

[steelersrock151]

Originally Posted by Robcards

How unfamiliar with the steelers are you? Check Casey's contract again, he's a FA no need to cut him. Explained in the other thread why the other 3 are non-factors

How unfamiliar? Guess not so much as you. Casey comes back if he wants to, you know that and I know that. McClendon is listed as 280, because thats what he was drafted at. He played this year at close to 330, and is the second strongest player on the team. And they love him.
Ta'amu could have been cut if they wanted to. They waived him, which means he's released if no one picks him up. The reason they waived him was because they needed another receiver on the team when almost the entire receiving corps was injured (see Plexico). Then they resigned him to the practice squad. Guess you didn't notice the Steelers' draft boards last year when they passed on him in the second, and then the third. They were going nuts.
Fangupo wasn't signed as camp fodder, he was signed off the Seahawks practice squad.
So, no, with ILB, OLB, Safety, Receiver, RB, and whatever, I don't see the Steelers taking the #3 nosetackle in the draft in the first, when they could almost definately get him in the second. If it was Hankins, then yes, maybe I could see it. But not Williams.

[Robcards]

Originally Posted by steelersrock151

How unfamiliar? Guess not so much as you. Casey comes back if he wants to, you know that and I know that.

He almost certainly will not be back. Did you think getting rid of all the old guys was just a one year thing last season? Gonna let Hines ward, James farrior, and Aaron smith go but re-sign Casey Hampton the following year? That makes no sense to me. He's likely done

[steelersrock151]

Originally Posted by Robcards

He almost certainly will not be back. Did you think getting rid of all the old guys was just a one year thing last season? Gonna let Hines ward, James farrior, and Aaron smith go but re-sign Casey Hampton the following year? That makes no sense to me. He's likely done

I'll agree that he's most likely done. Should have said if THEY want him back. But it will be at a vet minimum, or just a little more. Getting rid of him does nothing for the cap.
So, as I said, I don't see it as a majorly pressing need, since they always have that option. And I find it hard to believe the Williams will be the best player available at pick #17, especially with the many positions of need we have this year.

[steelersrock151]

BTW, did you change it from Williams to Jenkins, or did I just misread the hell out of it the first time? I could almost get on board with Jenkins.
Sorry if I was a dumbarse there. It was Williams at 17 that I had the biggest problem with.