BrewerFan

Same here... He likely just knew he was going earlier. I thought he left Miami because there was too many "distractions."

I think Will Johnson is coming off the board to Tampa here...hope not, but...he's a great fit.

Seattle with Zabel... That's again pretty early, but he's gonna be an All-Pro...IMO. I loved him for the Packers back when he was being mocked in the ~80 range, but he started really moving up after the Sr. Bowl.

Would you have been opposed to him in the 1st rd? I'm never mad at adding to the OL/DL early on. Seattle goes...Harmon?

Will Johnson available, Barron...who I'm not totally sold on, Harmon, Shemar Stewart. CB will be interesting with so few guys having done all the testing but with really good tape.

Browns fans are losing their minds and that's the best possible move IMO. Hunter is awesome, but he's a smaller dude, so it's risky thinking he'll play 100 snaps. And the Browns, reportedly, viewed him as a WR. He's not worth the #2 pick as a WR. Add that future 1st...not to mention the 2nd and 4th, but that's a great move. The best pick so far(AS a Packers fan) is Loveland to the Bears at 10 when Warren was on the board..if you wanted a TE!

LOL...yeah, it was smart back when they took Zach Martin and...guys like that. They pulled Jerry back from taking too many WR or in that case, Johnny Manziel, but Tyler Booker? He's nice and all, but that's wild. If there's an OL there named Tyron, Tyler, anything close, Jerry's taking him!

I can't believe the Bears just took a TE and ...he wasn't from Penn State. That's a baffling pick to me.

I like the Burch and Williams...I like them a lot better in the 3rd and 4th rds. Williams reminds me of a Craig Newsome type. Just...solid, nothing spectacular.

We definitely need multiple positions. I wasn't arguing that they need to take a CB 1st...though, ideally, you would, but more that you need a CB early and I'd like to see a couple CBs.

It's understood that they WILL be playing those players outside. That's kinda the issue. What I've said...and I feel like this is...really straight forward and "succinct," is that those players, particularly Hobbs, played the majority of their snaps in the slot and he's played much better at slot. He moved outside after a great rookie year in the slot and struggled so they moved him back to the slot. Yeah, we won't be playing them there...but you responded to me replying about drafting Porter, and the TYPE of CBs we should draft and responded with the "lets not pretend we don't have anyone." You guessed right. Played slot. He was one of the top rookies. They moved him outside, he was bad. They then moved him back to the slot. I misspoke. Evan Wiliams out played Bullard. This site has been freezing up on me so I can't go back and read my post. I think Bullard was fine as a traditional safety. He was developing, but Williams came in and played *GREAT* and now there's now...Bullard will either play Slot or a 3rd safety. But the safeties are set, it's McKinney and Williams. As simply as I can say this...MLF hired Hafley because he wanted a more aggressive defense. 1-The post you replied to with me "pretending" we had no depth, it wasn't about the DEPTH we have as LouisEly had the Packers drafting 2 CBs in the top 4 picks, it was about the type of players the Packers will look for at Cornerback. 2-I don't think they're going to look at a guy who started one year and played virtually no press coverage and is not comfortable in press. That's the point I'm making. That was the only real point I'm making...though it's obviously relevant when our CB depth chart at the moment, regardless of where they PLAN on playing guys, goes 4 deep with one of them being a safety and then...and I don't even know why this is a part of the debate, but 2 of the other 3 who have played mostly in the slot. That's not opinion, that's just a fact. It's also just true that they've both graded out higher at slot, particularly Hobbs. So AGAIN, that doesn't mean they have to take a CB at #23. It does mean that's the weakest position on the team at the moment and IF you're going to use a pick on that player high in the draft, it'd make sense that you'd want a player who fits your scheme, right? As I said originally, maybe they think they can coach Porter to play more aggressively, but I didn't agree that they could draft a CB high, that they prefer to play zone and then as a result, draft a zone CB high and then let him develop for a year. You're one injury away from a player who was cut off a 90 man roster from getting snaps. Maybe that player will be Tramon Williams I guess...

That'd be a very nice draft...I just wonder what they'd do with Ersery and Wright. Kick Wright over to the left side? He seems like a better fit at LT than Ersery. Judkins is a stud, Sa'Vion Jones is a good fit in that defense. Felton would give them a good, young WR with size and speed. I'm guessing they're going Will Campbell if he's there or going a little harder after OL overall, but...interesting draft. Really hate seeing the Bears and Lions both having competent front offices. It's just been the Packers and Vikings for a while now.

So we're trading down with KC and then trading up for...Caleb Rogers? Assuming Doubs and Jaire are on the block, where do you think those picks end up? Dallas is apparently high on Doubs. Maybe a swap of 2nd rd picks and one of Dallas' many later picks? Is that a bit too ambitious? Jaire, Cincy seems like a good fit. They've got a pick at...153. I'm not sure we can ask for much more unless we take on some of his salary. This would be much easier with Jaire back. Any thoughts on Slater from Sacramento St or Cornelius? Former Wisconsin OL have surprised me before, I am with you on the Logan Brown sentiment, but...I get the impression it's less about the specific player there than the position. Again, love Buchanan. I think he fits a role on this team very well. I'm still about...50% sure the Packers take a "WTH" pick in Rd1. If Mykel Williams is on the board, is he the pick?

Opinion? That Hobbs and Nixon have played the majority of their time in the slot and that's where they played their best or that CB is a need? I guess we'll find out if the Packers believe that or not based on the draft. As for being better in the slot or outside...I'm just going off past performance. If the Packers don't believe that Hobbs can play outside, that'd be...well, just one of the worst signings they've made in a while. They provide a floor... I didn't rail against the signing of Hobbs, but you're responding to me making the argument the Packers have very little depth at CB, particularly on the boundary. I also don't really think there's much...if any history supporting Hobbs being very good outside of the slot. After a breakout rookie year, he moved to the slot and played very poorly there...so the Raiders moved him back. Did he? He looked pretty solid as a traditional safety...playing the run, playing over the top...but Evan Williams **Took his job and Bullard played worse. I would certainly hope they'd give their 2nd round pick more time, but his coverage in the slot last year was...bad. I would certainly think they expect more out of him, but he didn't play well in the slot. "he played 361 snaps in the slot, he allowed a high completion percentage (84.2%) against him, resulting in a 2024 rookie ranking of 27th among defensive backs." I would certainly think they expect more out of him, but he didn't play well in the slot. Over 8 out of 10 passes when he was in coverage were completed. Could be they brought in Hobbs as some protection in the event Bullard doesn't improve...or they just missed out on the top options. I do disagree that they paid him too much to play slot. 4/48, 16M SB is not hardly out of line for a slot corner in the modern NFL. Ok... well, I went position by position and we have more depth at DE, DT and WR. It's not a ringing endorsement of the depth we have there, I just think it says more about the CB depth we have. As for when they draft a CB, I'd hope they don't draft one at 23 just because it's a need, but I think that position is there biggest hole. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

It makes it tough when they don't clearly articulate how they arrive at those grades. They also just don't know the coverage being called at times so they can't know who is responsible. AS for Valentine, I'd agree he looked better as a rookie, but I also wonder how much of that was just him getting beat because the pass rush wasn't getting home? If you leave him in man and the QB has 3-4 seconds, even the best CBs are going to give up big plays. You can get by with mediocre CB play like the Vikings have if you are getting after the QB and forcing the ball out quickly. We didn't do that a whole lot. Some positions are easier to grade than others. I would think CB would be among the toughest. One more thing about the CB rankings...obviously Hunter is #1, but what are your thoughts on the Browns looking at him as a WR who occasionally plays DB...which seems appropriately backwards for the Browns. I'd give him a few snaps at WR, but have him play CB...but that's why they're picking 2nd....

The CB rankings look...almost perfect...IMO. It's just too hard to nail these guys down without the testing. Barron isn't an ideal fit...he's shorter, but he's just physical and tough. Jaire wasn't a questionable fit as well and despite the situation we're currently in, that was a great pick. The Packers are going to likely have to break some trends. Barron's length, Hairston size, most of these guys didn't do the agility. So they'll have to lean heavily on the tape which favors...IMO, Johnson, Morrison and Revel or they just overlook Barron's length and take him should he fall. Johnson falling like Mitchell would be ideal, Thomas in the 2nd rd of a trade down would be great(either or) and then Williams in the 4th. I don't think he's a star, but I think he could step in and play right away and be a very good all-around player. I think for what they paid Hobbs, Paulson Adebo or DJ Reed seemed like...the most obvious fits. Reed got 3/48M and Adebo got 3/54.. I wonder if the Packers insistence on not handing out guaranteed money beyond the SB hurts them? It seems odd to me they wouldn't pay more for either of those guys...OR maybe they are going to play more of a zone heavy Cover3 like SF does or Seattle did? They want CBs who can come up and play the run and make the tackles in front of them? Or maybe they just tried and those guys wanted to be in New York and Detroit respectively. Hard to say, but Hobbs was a little bit of an odd choice knowing you wanted to move on from Jaire. As for other players, I've watched more Golden and Egbuka. Golden reminds me of a JSN type WR but he has that top end speed. He's pretty smooth and complete. Egbuka...I went back and watched him as well. I think some of these guys you just see for so many years, maybe I'm underrating him, but I would be a lot better with him at #23 than I would have been a couple weeks ago. Especially if you're talking about trading Doubs(which has been rumored). I think both can come in and play at a relatively high level year 1(as opposed to a guy like Thornton from Tennessee who I like, but in a far more limited role early on). I completely agree with this take though...and even did a little silly mock draft. Totally pointless as it gives you WAY too much to trade back, but you can easily go through and eliminate like 4 picks where I got a little redundant, but the top of the draft is how I'd like the Packers draft to look and just a general idea in the middle rds. One big dark horse I have is Jackson Slater, an IOL from little Sacramento State. In this little exercise he was gone in the top 100 which is unlikely, but he's an athlete and he's a really physical player who can slide in and contribute earlier. I also just want to be covered on the OL in case...Morgan doesn't become a really good LT(don't want to pay Walker with those knees). I actually have no positive opinion of Williams from UT, but I wanted to add an OT...which I guess the Oregon kid is, but you can erase that pick as we're not getting that many for trading down(I don't think). Same with Slater, Frazier...Cornelius. I think we'll take 3 if we add picks, but not 4 OL and I have 5(albeit one who won't play this year). Also, just bring in competition. Jenkins is due 20M last year and you don't know how the transition will go(and I don't think he's been the same since the ACL). As for the more...realistic picks.... I went Hairston over Thomas at CB. I may go the other way due to the physical style of play with Thomas. I think Nohl Williams can also play snaps Yr1. I think he's a ballhawk and probably best in press but solid playing zone and a Ball Hawk. Still...a fit. I would love this if they kept Jaire and got a healthy season out of him, but I think this would help solve the depth issue. Plus, we have elite Safety play behind them. DT-Grant and Farmer replace Slaton and then MAYBE help to replace Clark...who is out of GTD money after this year and declined pretty badly last year. I also really like the kid from Toledo, Alexander, but he's got a little too much helium on these mocks. I don't think he's a 1st or 2nd rd pick. Landon Jackson reminds me...a LITTLE of Arik Armstead. He's long, athletic. I think he could also kick inside and play DT in the sub. Jayden Higgins, I love Thornton, but Higgins is a potential #1 WR and he's a big body. After that, if you could give me 2 of the IOL and Cornelius, I'd be thrilled. LB, the kid from Cal is an athlete who can be a demon on STs and help vs the run right away and be an impact between Quay and Cooper long term. Same with Kobe King...who I think goes around the same time, not a late day 3 pick. But the main theme is last year we went with kinda secondary positions. LB, Safety, RB with our 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th pick in the top ~95. We need to hit those premium positions and Gutekunst has said there's more talent later in this draft than normal AND they were older. That may suggest we see a slightly different approach and more guys who wouldn't "fit" the Packers parameters in the past. But I'd definitely like to see an extra day 2 pick and a couple extra day 3 picks to move down ~20 spots and add more talent IF there isn't a guy like Johnson, maybe Stewart, Bolden available. I also think we'll end up with a couple extra as I think we deal a couple guys. Doubs and Ja. Doubs could net us a 4th rd pick from Dallas perhaps? Ja, I have no idea. I wonder if there's any thought to taking on some of his contract, eating some dead money to get a better pick? Maybe 6M we turn into a bonus and maybe we get back a 3rd? More dead money, but could be worth it in this draft.

I am definitely saying the part in bold. We have a big need at CB with Jaire moving. To respond to the part underlined, I'm pointing out that is where 2 of the 3 CBs we have on the roster who have played, have played the vast majority of the time in the NFL and where they have played at their best. Those are just two things that are true. So if we draft a CB in the first two Rds, I'd expect him to play a lot in the first year, to play outside and to be capable of playing the style of Football they've both(MLF, Hafley) have repeatedly said they'd like to play...

He moved out there when they tried to get Bullard and Even Williams into the lineup. He had a 62.5 PFF grade in coverage at that time(vs Arizona) and finished the year with a grade of 60.7. So his grade was better in the slot...in coverage. He's an exceptional CB vs the run and on occasion when they send him on a CB blitz. Graded 115th out of 222 CBs in coverage. Nate Hobbs was 102. Jaire incidentally was 16th in coverage and Valentine was 22nd. So...I'd say it was out of necessity, but I don't think it changes my larger point. You have very little depth at CB and most of their experience has come in the slot...especially if you assume Jaire is gone Valentine is a nice young CB. He'd currently be our #2 with Nixon as our #1(based on last years overall snaps)... Yeah, I imagine he'll play outside as well...but all I said was he's been primarily a slot CB. You just posted that he played over 70% of his snaps in the slot. He was in the slot when he was outstanding as a rookie. They tried him as a boundary CB his 2nd year in the league and he struggled...which prompted the Raiders to move him back to the slot the last part of the year. On top of that, he's missed 16 games the past 3 seasons. He plays very aggressively. That's a little hyperbolic, no? I literally listed the players we have who play CB who have any reasonable NFL experience. I even added Bullard, a safety. So I don't think I was "pretending" they have no one out there, I'm pointing out it's a major area of need, the lack of depth and how if we're going to draft a guy 54th...it seems unlikely to me that you're going to draft a guy who is largely the antithesis of everything your HC and DC have said they want. And unlike Nixon or Hobbs who are both aggressive, physical in run support, Porter is not that. He's not a strong tackler. He does excel in other areas of the game that make him a really interesting prospect for the right team, but look at who Gute has drafted, then combine that with what MLF and Hafley have said about what they would LIKE to do on defense(personnel permitting). I also quoted both Hafley and MLF's desire to play MORE Press Man and Cover1(which was by far Hafley's most consistent pre-snap look) and how LaFleur himself spoke about how Hafley had to adjust to the personnel that was available to him. You can't really play Press or Man if your front 4 can't get home and your DBs don't fit that style of play. Jaire...he fits. Revel, Hairston, Thomas, I can't imagine anyone feeling very comfortable about our CB depth as stands(probably why Louis had 3 CBs as his choices or in the case or Marshall, "if he's available." You acknowledged they could go CB in Rd1. So I'm not sure what I pointed out that wasn't already obvious...other than not finding Porter to be the best fit for the Packers. We have 3 CBs and we're going to need to cover...~1100-1200 snaps from two of them, probably another 800 from a 3rd. That's asking 3 guys to stay healthy for 17 and one of the three was above average in coverage last year...Valentine. I would say looking at the roster, there's no position as thing as CB. At least relative to the expected snaps you ask from your CBs. At edge, you have LVN...he was a pretty solid pass rusher last year(better than Gary in his first two years). Enagbare, Cox Jr had a 72 PFF grade a 72.2 Pass rushing grade...and Mosby, a 5th edge. You play 2 at a time. DT-Again, 2 at a time. Clark, Wyatt, Brooks, Wooden But Harmon in Rd 1? Yeah, I love that. WR-Similar depth to WR, but we also have guys like Heath and Melton...as well as at least two very good pass catching TEs(when healthy). I like Horton in Rd 3. I like Riley in Rd4, Marshall if he's available in Rd 7. Nohl Williams, a heavy press man CB in the middle Rds. Those guys are GREAT fits, particularly the last two and I think they are just about perfect for what Hafley likes to do. I just...don't completely agree with the 2nd Rd projection LouisEly gave the Packers. I also have different players I may prefer. Thornton at WR over pretty much everyone else in the middle rds. I liked Morgan, Cooper and Bullard last year. My top 3 in the last mock I posted on here. Right now, it looks like the only one I got right(and the Packers for that matter) was Cooper, the LB from Texas A&M everyone wanted, so not exactly unique. It's just fans throwing out their opinions for fun before the actual draft based on the rosters we have. And we don't even know who may be completely off the Packers board(such as Bond) or who they may love) like Golden).

Would we rather have Smith, pick #33 and Yophery Rodriguez? I guess...more importantly, does it matter at this point? Not really directed to you, but... 'it is what it is.'

He was a NT in a 3-4, so...he's going to be doubled much more. As for the numbers...I guess it depends on what you're looking for in his numbers(also, his numbers are pretty similar to Graham's numbers). I'm looking for a guy who can collapse the pocket, play the run, keep the LBers clean...and then the fact that he's really good at getting his hands up and in throwing lanes is a nice ancillary benefit. Vita Via isn't stacking the stat book, but I assume we'd agree if you could get a Vita Vea at #23, you'd definitely do that, right? Maybe Kenny Clark? Would you take a young Clark again? If you watched his tape and you were unimpressed...I guess on that I'd just agree to disagree. He may end up an average rotational player. Better chance than not, that's what you'll get, even in the bottom half of the 1st rd from any DL(or CB, Edge). They're pretty high miss rates...but I think he's got a floor of being a really good 1 tech and being a good rotational player and the upside to be a whole lot more(Vita Vea was just an example, it's not reasonable to expect that from any DT in this draft).

Yeah, I've seen them, but they seem REALLY petty so far. It basically amounts to(as far as I can tell) he transferred too many times, he hasn't been as productive as his recruiting ranking would suggest he should be. They go over these kids like crazy. If that's the worst you've got at 21 years old? I don't know, the effort issues...where sometimes it wanes, that is about all I'd be worried about. The Packers also have a massive scouting staff and they investigate and do a lot of digging on these guys.

Porter had 203 snaps in coverage all year. Revel who did tear his ACL had 138 in just 3 games this year. I'm not sure receptions given up is the best metric. But if you're looking at picks, he had 2 in those 3 games and a passer rating of 48.8. I don't particularly think that matters either, but But more importantly... he appears to be a better fit. You watched both I assume, right? Porter is really not comfortable up on the LOS and Revel is much more comfortable there, playing man. He also obviously sags off and plays zone. I'm not arguing who is going to go higher...though I think Revel was going to be a pretty easy 1st rd pick based off the last 2 years, but if Hafley still wants to play the type of defense that he and Lafleur said they wanted to play, I think Revel is a better fit and it doesn't make a lot of sense to draft someone who you don't anticipate being able to play in that very scheme. I like ....Nohl Williams who I think you mentioned, Marshall from Florida, Riley is a good option. Hafley's also a great DB coach...so maybe he'll think he can develop Porter.

Hafley has been pretty clear about a desire to play a lot of press man as well though(as has Matt LaFleur). And MLF end of season; What did he want to do? This on top of...countless comments from LaFleur over the years where he'd push Barry to play more aggressive, play more "sticky," which... means play more man coverage. They still finished top ~10 in Man Coverage and that was with Jaire was in and out of the lineup and the pass rush wasn't getting home. But just right out of the gate last year vs the Eagles, they played Cover 0 about half as much in that game as they played the entire year before under Barry. They also played a decent chunk of Cover1 Man and C2 Man. There were other factors, but the pre-snap look he favors is a single high man. They ended up rotating into Cover 2 Zone a lot last year, but it's not a great disguise unless you...actually play man. That's not to say Porter can't develop into a VERY good CB, but to spend the 54th pick on a guy who is already 24 years old at a position where longevity isn't great and you don't anticipate him to play for a year? Which brings me to... In all likelihood, the Packers depth chart at CB right now(with the assumption that Jaire is traded, likely during the draft or cut if they can't find a trade that works, but in any event, it seems unlikely he's brought back). That leaves; CB1-CB-Nixon-Primarily a slot CB until moved there last year out of necessity as much as anything, but certainly not a prototypical boundary CB. CB2-Nate Hobbs-Primarily a Slot CB CB3-Valentine-He can play outside, but didn't really take a 2nd year jump. Slot-Bullard was primarily used as a slot CB. (and then Riley...who I do like in Rd4). That's 3 guys who are at their best in the slot or at least have played primarily slot and Valentine, a 7th rd pick who looks like he's got some talent, but not a sure thing and there is a big drop off after him. Kamal Haden, Isaiah Dunn, both guys who were cut and the Packers picked up this off-season. If you were bringing Jaire back, that would change the equation a bit, but if you're assuming he's gone, and it seems like most are, you're either abandoning the shift Hafley and MLF talked about, shift to more of a Tampa 2 type defense or even a Cover 3(which Porter is a great fit in). Or it's possible they just think Porter can be coached to use his long arms better, but either way, as our 2nd Rd pick, I don't know that you can take a CB at arguably our thinnest position and say we don't really need him because of Nate Hobbs in his rookie year. LaFleur also commented about how Hafley did a good job of adjusting to his personnel, but if you're going out and acquiring that personnel, I'd hope you'd target the type of players who fit what Hafley has said he wants to do. I like Porter...but you're getting a project who's already turned 24, has limited experience at CB and he's going to be our 2nd pick and not expect to play? DT-Grant, Nolan or Harmon in Rd 1 all make sense. Rd 2-3, Alexander, Collins, Lott, Turner, Walker(maybe late Rd3) CB-Rd 1, Will Johnson...if he does slide down the board would be a relatively obvious pick. Revel has similar elite athleticism, but also is much more physical in press. Amos is also a guy in that 1st rd Range who has more experience in press man. RD2-I think CBs like Hairston(21), Morrison(21), Thomas...might fit the Packers a bit better if they fall to the 2nd rd...and they're all younger...as compared to Riley and Porter who are both ~24 years old. Thomas is one of the younger players and won't turn 21 for a few months yet. They're all guys who can play zone...obviously, zone is just easier, but they all have more experience playing in press man schemes. Edge-If Stewart is there, I think that'll be their pick. Again, 6'6 290 with his athletic ability? Williams from UGA is...in the same boat. He's the obvious pick, both are gone. Beyond that, Mike Green would be popular. I think Scourton would be a great pick. He's not 21 yet, he's got natural bend, he should be able to come in and play year one and help with the pass rush and still has room to fill out into a complete edge. Landon Jackson in the 2nd could be an option. Pearce and Ezeiuaku could be just pass rush specialist, but they're better fits at 3-4 OLBs. WR-I don't think this is a great class. Bond just got accused of sexual assault. That's...not something you roll the dice on. I'm sure they've had it investigated, but I don't see him being taken. The kid from AZ will be gone. I don't think they add one until Day 3 unless there's a perfect fit and I don't think there are many of those. Golden is the only one who could be there in Rd1 that I'd take. He's got the speed, but he's a complete WR....which is why I think he'll be gone. I like Horton, Thorton Jr and Felton in the 3-4 rd range. They all have good speed and some flaws, but they can help round out the WR'ing core. OL, there are a ton of great IOL in the first two days. Mbow, 3 UGA guys, 3 Ohio State line, you touched on one of each. If they take one in the first 3 rds, it'll probably be protection against Jenkins or Walker for next year. Trapilo, the LT from Boston College is a really interesting prospects though likely gone before we're picking in the fourth anyway. Grey from Oregon STate was one of my favorite prospects last year. OG who can play RT(as a backup). Good late rd option. Again, I'd consider Simmons from Ohio State in Rd 1. He was a consensus top 10 pick before the ACL. Donovan Jackson reminds me of Elgton Jenkins. He can clearly play OT, but would be a great fit as a OG in the Packers scheme...which I THINK is going to end up being more of a mix of zone and gap when they get Marshawn Lloyd(an underrated "addition" from last year). But I don't think they'll go back to the OL this year. AT least not the first 2 rds. But I like the UGA IOL. All three, Fairchild, Rateledge and Wilson. Any surprise picks on the OL, especially early would be that pick that gets the fans upset, but they're always forward looking. Jenkins could be in his last year(as Clark could be in HIS last year). The only thing I'm confident about is... the Packers fans will be pissed if we don't draft whoever PFF has graded the highest and people will be ABSOLUTELY positive that we could have traded down and got X player later in the draft with zero consideration to the fact that...maybe teams didn't want to trade up or he's better than PFF thinks.

He'd be more of a pass rush specialist than a starting DE. That's not the worst thing in the world. Pearce from UT is kinda in that same group, but I'm not sure they'd take one at #23 who will just play passing downs, but being from BC, it's more likely than normal. Here's Pearce. Not necessarily advocating for one or the other...though Pearce looks like he's got more room to fill out and grow, but his SEC experience is a big check in his column. Not as big as being coached by Hafley already, but...still. Two guys who I think fit the Packers needs, Darius Alexander, DT Toledo in the 2nd. He's older, so he may go later, but he's a stud. Dont'e Thornton Jr WR, Tenn. He's a freak athlete. 6'5, 4.3 40. Played in that gimmicky offense at Tennessee. He'll probably get over-drafted, but if he's there in the 4th, that'd be a great pick. I think he's a better version of MVS(which...is kinda what Watson has been thus far). I don't think that's a bad thing though. He's thicker and he catches the ball a lot cleaner than Watson or MVS...but none of the Tennessee guys come out real polished. At least not QB/WR. But he's a Day1 Deep Threat who can open up the middle of the field, he can also run a lot of the quick hitters they tried to run with Watson. But primarily a deep threat.

Tee Higgins? What is a "crap ton," and how do you pull that off before they tag him? I won't go into what Love will "never be," as I think that's silly, but Higgins has been tagged before Free Agency has started(you can't do so after). And I don't think he's a #1. But you'd be trading and paying him as though he's a #1. I honestly don't get the fixation with Higgings like he's right in that group with Jefferson, Chase, Lamb and...I don't even know who else you'd be talking about. He also not really the type of WR that we need. If you wanted anyone, DK would make more sense. A deep threat. Higgings is a possession WR. He's a nice...solid, reliable WR. Not giving up a 1st for him and a "crap ton" sounds like a lot more than a 1st. Xavier McKinney doesn't qualify? Their biggest need last year...the top player at that position? I thought that was a "big free agent" and you just said this years crop wasn't the greatest to choose from.