Competition to Come at Quarterback This Summer
Expect Sean Clifford to have a little heat behind him in training camp
By GregMeinholz
For around 85% of my almost 37-year lifespan on this planet, the Green Bay Packers have had an embarrassment of riches at the Quarterback position. Brett Favre, Aaron Rodgers, and now it appears lightning perhaps has struck three times in TitleTown with Jordan Love. John Madden used to say "The best time to look for a quarterback is when you don't need one." Well, even though Madden turned down the idea of coaching the Packers in the 80s due to being content in the broadcast booth, it appears he still may have left a small impression on the organization. Drafting an heir-apparent quarterback while still having a great one on the roster is exactly how the Packers have had success at the position for so long.
Former Packers GM Ron Wolf perhaps kicked off this trend, as despite having Brett Favre under center for the majority of his tenure, he still drafted seven other signal callers. Four of those picks were fairly notable. Ty Detmer, Mark Brunell, Aaron Brooks, and Matt Hasselbeck went on to start for other teams with Brunell, Brooks, and Hasselbeck having pretty decent success. The Packers weren't left out in the cold after their future success either as they traded Brunell, a 5th-round pick, for a 3rd and 5th from Jacksonville, Brooks, drafted in the 4th round was traded to New Orleans with Lamont Hall for LB KD Williams and a 3rd round pick, and then Hasselbeck, drafted in the 6th round was traded to Seattle for the Packers to jump 7 picks in the first round to 10th overall as well as collect another 3rd round pick in the process.
In the 23 drafts following Wolf's tenure, however, outside of Aaron Rodgers and Jordan Love, the Packers have only drafted seven other Quarterbacks. Only Matt Flynn could be considered notable, but his success only really ever came in relief of Aaron Rodgers. To be honest, all the other QBs in a Packers uniform between 2001 and 2023 have been rather lackluster.
Luckily for the Packers, except for maybe 2 seasons of those 22, they've never really needed that backup quarterback to perform. But I don't think they're willing to continue taking that risk.
Drafting Insurance
In the fifth round of the 2023 draft, the Packers picked QB Sean Clifford. Immediately social media blew up that the Packers reached for this pick as Clifford was projected to not even be drafted. But in true social media fashion, four months later suddenly Clifford was supposed to be starting over Jordan Love according to some accounts. Though that comment was perhaps a little far-fetched, it's still a testament to Clifford's performance out of the gate. The Packers decided not to bring in any other competition outside of Alex McGough who spent the season on the practice squad because Clifford showed he was capable of occupying that backup position.
But Brian Gutekunst isn't just stopping there.
On Tuesday, at the NFL Draft Combine, Gutekunst said he wants to "get back to drafting multiple quarterbacks." And why shouldn't he? The quarterback position is the most important in the league, it's not one to just say "We have one good one, that's all we need."
There's a strong chance that before the 2024 campaign gets underway, Jordan Love will be signed to a long-term deal. So, while we're seemingly rich at the position, why not continue to bring in talent behind him? It can't just be Jordan Love and a "maybe he'll be good" backup. Have one or two options battle it out to ensure we have the best we can get behind #10. Go get Tom Clements another Quarterback to mold. See what happens. If God forbid Jordan Love goes down, maybe for once Packers fans won't feel as if the season is over without QB1. Maybe we'll have a talented QB2 that can win a few games for us too until Love can get back on the field.
Perhaps we can then get back to the 90s in terms of selling our backup QBs for future assets. Maybe in a year or so that 5th round Sean Clifford pick could be traded for a third. Maybe a 6th round QB drafted in 2024 could be traded to a first or second after developing behind Jordan Love.
If a Quarterback is taken in the draft, it doesn't always mean there's a threat to the starter's job. I have memories of Brett Hundley being drafted in the 5th round of the 2015 draft and some people staring in utter confusion at the pick of a QB after Aaron Rodgers just had an MVP season. I think everyone knows by now that Hundley was no threat to Aaron Rodgers at all, but more an attempt at a good insurance policy or future trade asset. The problem is Hundley never truly caught on and was later traded for a lesser asset in a 6th round pick.
If Brian Gutekunst decides to draft another QB in the 2024 draft, I can't wait to see the competition between that selection and Sean Clifford this summer. If the Packers need them, they'll be there. Otherwise, it doesn't hurt to invest some time in future greater draft capital.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Greg Meinholz is a lifelong devoted Packer fan. A contributor to CheeseheadTV as well as PackersTalk. Follow him on Twitter @gmeinholz for Packers commentary, random humor, beer endorsements, and occasional Star Wars and Marvel ramblings.
__________________________
Comments (80)
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou
February 28, 2024 at 12:23 pm
Greg,
Great article and I too would like to see the Packers return to the drafting of QBs. With the number of draft selections the Packers have this year, they would likely be foolish to pass up a QB late in the draft if there was one they had highly rated.
You bring up the drafting of Brett Hundley in 2015. The following is the tale of two tapes and whether a QB like Aaron Rodgers recognizes talent and the organization's intent. Now before going any further, I recognize there are 'many' factors that go into whether a QB has an okay season vs a great season, but with that aside let's look at Aaron Rodgers's statistics when Hundley was drafted vs when Jordan Love was drafted.
Aaron Rodger's 2014 season (before Hundley)
2014 - 65.6% completion - 4,381 yards - 38 TDs - 5 Ints - Rating 112.2
2015 - 60.7% completion - 3,821 yards - 31 TDs - 8 Ints - Rating 92.7 (Rodger's likely did not see much competition might be one factor)
Aaron Rodger's 2019 season (before Jordan Love)
2019 - 62.7% - 4,002 yards - 26 TDs - 4 Ints - Rating 95.4
2020 - 70.7% - 4,299 yards - 48 TDs - 5 Ints - Rating 121.5 (season after Jordan Love was drafted in round 1 - yup, he was pissed and motivated)
Yes, I believe competition at all positions is a huge motivator and even the best competitors will respond and play harder & better.
Great article!
PackEyedOptimist
February 28, 2024 at 01:37 pm
"they would likely be foolish to pass up a QB...IF ONE IS CLEARLY AT THE TOP OF THEIR BOARD AT ANY TIME."
FTFY
jannesbjornson
February 28, 2024 at 01:48 pm
So, they take Nix @ #25 if he's there?
stockholder
February 28, 2024 at 02:22 pm
You beat me to it.
Great choice.
jannesbjornson
February 28, 2024 at 02:58 pm
Two more months of this stuff...
jannesbjornson
February 28, 2024 at 03:24 pm
PFN with trade downs. Some moving for boat anchor OTs, frees up the secondary:
#34 Kinchens FS
#41 Nubin SS
#44 T. Sweat DT
#62 C.Carson CB
#86 B. Irving RB
#91 Jalen Ford LB
#100 D.Glaze OT
#127 D.Johnson RB
#162 I.Adams OG
#168 Eichenberg LB
#204 Kamara Edge/OLB
#216 A.Gould WR/PR/KR
#229 Oghoufo Edge/OLB
#243 Eguakun C
#251 N. Ceasar Edge/OLB
Bag Kendall Fuller as the Free agent CB..No need for training wheels.
golfpacker1
February 28, 2024 at 03:37 pm
No stellar Oline stands out bigtime, we don't need Kinchens and Nubin. One or the other. Were there no good Oline left? Beebe and Puni should have been there, if not Suamataia.
Was Jaylon Ford the only LB left when you picked?
Love both RB choices. Dillon Johnson is underrated. Alvin Kamara is the comp.
I do always grab Isaac Guerendo-RB-Louisville later.
jannesbjornson
February 28, 2024 at 05:16 pm
I would not take a guard over a playmaker. Who do you want to start at safety, Owens and Johnson? This is how it fell: Morgan and the top OT/RTs were picked up early, so trade down from #25 and acquire more choices in the meat of this draft. Jaylon Ford is comparable to Colson, but is a better hitter. Guerendo may be taken earlier than expected. He dominated in Louisville's Bowl Game. They probably re-sign Runyan on a show-me deal? I want the secondary rebuilt. Bring Fuller onboard and not overpay for Free agent safeties.
golfpacker1
February 29, 2024 at 08:40 am
Jaylon Ford is nowhere near Colson in ratings or ability. I think the draft falls better to GB if we get a good OT/OG with our first pick, especially if we stay @ #25. With a tradeback scenario, it depends on how far we trade back.
SicSemperTyrannis
February 29, 2024 at 05:11 pm
Definitely make O line top priority, wherever that means drafting them. Nobody else preserves the career of your QB.
stockholder
February 28, 2024 at 03:42 pm
I still like Wright at RB - Over Irving
if Gute doesn't take a ILB by 58.
It will be a mistake.
If your out to stop the run
You need Lbs in a 4-3.
Whose fast at LB?
Other than Walker.
The 4-2 will require bigger safeties.
jannesbjornson
February 28, 2024 at 05:25 pm
Bigger DTs are required. The LBs (should) take care of the run. The safeties prevent the runner from escaping. Ford, Colson , Payton Wilson, Cooper, Gray, Trotter are all better LBs than Walker. In real terms, I would try to bag three of these guys. Aaron Casey from Indiana is a sleeper. Nubin is 210- 215lbs which is the weight range for a strong safety. Forget Barry and Dom. We'll see if Hafley studies Spags and Gutedkunst brings in smart players.
stockholder
February 28, 2024 at 06:01 pm
I can see Sweat only at DT.
Late 2nd! Early 3rd.
I'll take Colson over Ford,
Better Tackler over hitting.
Wilson is my Favorite with Cooper.
Nubin good call!
jannesbjornson
February 28, 2024 at 09:10 pm
Colson was getting washed up at the point of attack vs OSU and Alabama. Stop the running back, enough chase LBs. Sweat will surprise people with his 40 and bench. He tossed the Washington O linemen around like rag dolls.
He may go in the first if Belichick was still in N.E.
jannesbjornson
February 28, 2024 at 09:47 pm
Wright is an interesting guy. He will be closer to 4.4 speed than 4.3 from his High School track days. He is heavier at 210lbs, one-cut runner, but Irving is more of a complete back as far as the Pro passing game goes and he ran in the full-bore offense of the Ducks with Nix running the show. Nix will go by mid-first. I rank him #3. In my remnant of a mind, he compares best to A.Jones and so does Watson from Memphis. He is the guy you have to have similar talent backing up. When A.Jones went out, the offense ran into quicksand. It wasn't all on the O line. I didn't like the shuffling of Wallace and Nijman. Nijman didn't earn the 4.3M given to him by the front office.
golfpacker1
February 29, 2024 at 08:50 am
Marshawn Lloyd is another good AJ clone/replacement, maybe slightly heavier. He has similar skills. Jawhar Jordan is also similar to Jones, but a little lighter and maybe faster.
From what I have read, Wright only scored 2 TDs last year. Compared to other RBs that is really low, a head scratcher.
Maybe a combo of AJ and Dillon would be the RB from Washington, Dillon Johnson. Or Audric Estime-Notre Dame.
Bucky Irving would be hard to pass up @ #88 or #91. He would make moving on from AJ seamless.
jannesbjornson
February 29, 2024 at 09:22 am
Yes, I would still move 2025 picks into Rd two to reap the harvest.
SicSemperTyrannis
February 29, 2024 at 06:04 pm
ALL DAY RAY!
MnPackerFan
March 01, 2024 at 04:37 am
Really like your numbers/positions
WestCoastPackerBacker
February 29, 2024 at 05:07 pm
Just a reminder that 2015 was the year of no WRs. Jordy Nelson was out all season with an ACL tear, Cobb was injured, but functioned, Davante Adams had a bum ankle and the lowest YPC of his entire career, James Jones came back after a year in Vegas and had an okay season, Jared Abbrederis was out with injury, Jeff Janis could run long and fast but had no route skills and Ty Montgomery was being converted to WR. The top TE was turtle Richard Rodgers. That #12 got them to a second playoff game and lost the lead and the coin toss. Well GB wouldn't have been anywhere near the playoffs without Rodgers.
And 2019? Rodgers let them to a 13-3 record. Hard to wish for more than that.
SicSemperTyrannis
February 29, 2024 at 06:06 pm
That's 7 WRs GB had in 2015. We have 8, if nobody poaches anyone.
Coldworld
February 28, 2024 at 01:09 pm
I’d not be surprised to see a new 3rd QB, but it’s clear they love Clifford and this was a comment about reinstating a QB pipeline in general, not this year particularly.
PackEyedOptimist
February 28, 2024 at 01:36 pm
I'm not sure I agree, CW. They didn't let Clifford throw a pass in the playoff game against Dallas, and it changed momentum. I'm not sure they completely trust him.
More importantly, Gute was commenting on the need for competition at every position--including QB. Even Love will benefit from being pushed by another talented QB--just as it resurrected Rodgers career when Love came in.
Coldworld
February 28, 2024 at 01:49 pm
They put Clifford in too early intending to run the clock out and didn’t succeed in moving the chains on the ground. The issue there was not so much lack of trust as intent and timing. So I don’t read much of anything into that in this context.
Cheezehead72
February 28, 2024 at 02:20 pm
If they do not let him pass then they are not confident in him. Yes it was too early if they were just going to run the ball but it was not too early if they were going to move the chains.
I still believe that they reached for Clifford. I am not saying that he will not be good someday but they drafted him earlier than they needed to. I believe that McGough is a better QB and is more ready to backup Love but Gute and MLF are enamored with Clifford.
DoubleJ
February 28, 2024 at 02:28 pm
"I still believe that they reached for Clifford. I am not saying that he will not be good someday but they drafted him earlier than they needed to."
There is a saying that if one GM feels someone is a R1 grade then other GMs feel the same way. We (the general public) don't know what a team's draft board looks like. However, it wouldn't surprise me that if the Packers didn't draft Clifford 14th pick in R5 (#149 overall) he would not have been there when they drafted at 159.
jannesbjornson
February 28, 2024 at 02:56 pm
It was probably between him and O'Connell, but he went to the Raiders at the end of Rd four. Clifford was fair value. He would have been there at #159.
SicSemperTyrannis
February 29, 2024 at 06:11 pm
Cheezehead72,
how much time did you spend watching the 3 of them in TC?
SicSemperTyrannis
February 29, 2024 at 06:10 pm
CW,
that part of the game saw #31 Wilson get a first down via 3 runs in a row, then he was benched.
Sheer insanity.
golfpacker1
February 28, 2024 at 03:42 pm
Clifford was a slightly above average college QB. He threw for over 10000 yards, but Penn State is an above average team that always has good talent on both sides of the ball. He does have the ability to run a little too. I think GB identified him as the guy they wanted, but I still think he was a UFDA.
Coldworld
February 28, 2024 at 03:54 pm
I hated the pick as I thought there were higher upside developmental projects later and in UDFA. Gute did say he was the last draftable QB on their board in their opinion. I did not have him as such.
However, what I’ve seen of him since had revised my opinion. I think he has potential as a back up and is more physically talented than I believed. Is he Love? No. However, I also thought his mental aspects were highlighted. He’s not flustered and goes thorough reads and progressions much better than most young draftees.
However, my view doesn’t matter. The team seems to love him and see upside. I don’t see him being seriously challenged intentionally this year. Maybe next in preparation to possibly moving him. His upside is probably as a Fill in starter and back up. In some ways he reminds me of Purdy though, so perhaps a scheme QB on a team that has plenty of other talent.
Our 3rd QB didn’t really impress me. I do see us looking for more upside there, but very late in the draft or a UDFA is my guess. Have him head to the PS and see if he progresses.
SicSemperTyrannis
February 29, 2024 at 06:16 pm
Clifford kept Will Levis off the field in College.
SicSemperTyrannis
February 29, 2024 at 06:08 pm
Knock,
I was hoping for exactly that. Between Clifford and Mr Magoo, I think our QB room is set pretty well right now. I was thinking this would be the draft to trade up, not needing 11 players but a few key people in specific spots.
It'll be interesting to see what Gutey does ...
crayzpackfan
February 28, 2024 at 01:14 pm
With this philosophy, they need to be very careful and thoughtful about how they go about it. They can't just draft the QB position just to draft it. They can't be wasting 2nd and 3rd round picks at the QB spot. They shouldn't ever reach for one lower in the draft when other needs are glaring. This should be a luxury pick, not some experiment driven by ego and fanfare.
Look who the coaches were during that time period when GB did this. It was an all-star team of offensive geniuses who, to be honest, had concerns about Favre's erratic play and wanted insurance. Plus, back then it was normal for teams to roster 3 QB's every year.
IMO - I think if the player is well vetted and scouted, falls into their pick, void of any goofy trading to make that pick, in the 5th though 7th round, I think every other year it might be a good idea to try for a handful of years.
Right now, I think GB should worry a lot more about the S, LB, OL, RB, and CB room than being cute with QB science projects. This current team is setting up nicely for a very near future run while on the cusp of cleaning up our cap issues for signing a FA or two if needed to get us that one piece.
How many current teams out there are turning out project QB's for high draft picks anyway? I certainly can't think of any. Just getting a number one overall QB pick is hard enough to develop. I can't imagine a coaching staff dedicating much of their time trying to develop a stable of QB's just for the sake of flipping them 2-3 years later for a 3rd round pick. Sounds like a waste of time and resources this day and age.
PackEyedOptimist
February 28, 2024 at 01:31 pm
So you're more worried about picking a RB than a QB? Even though we have a pro-bowl RB as our starter, and RB is the easiest position in football to fill?
Your condescending comments about it being a "science project" are ridiculous.
Having a high-quality back-up QB is a NEED if you believe your team is capable of making the playoffs. If Love gets injured, that shouldn't be the end of hope for the rest of the team.
crayzpackfan
February 28, 2024 at 01:51 pm
So out of all the positions I mentioned and you cherry pick the RB position I mentioned to stage your argument? The article clearly stated that back in the day, GB was a QB mill. I went with that. They were a QB mill then. It worked. For reasons I clearly stated. I am not sure you read my entire post if science projects and running backs is all you got out of it.
But humor me. How many QB's should we have drafted and stockpiled and rostered to calm your doomsday scenario? Not one single team has a qualified 3 deep QB room while most barely have 2 deep. With what QB's get paid in todays market, not to mention time and resources, to what extent are you saying we should go? My opinion is just that. Nothing condescending about it. If you want to discuss this we can, but try to not be so personal about it.
PackEyedOptimist
February 28, 2024 at 02:09 pm
It's about picking the best player available, better than whoever you have currently filling the role, and if we put weight on positions, QB is the #1.
It's not a "Doomsday scenario," starting QBs go down all the time, and it doesn't matter if they are young. If we believe we have a Super Bowl caliber roster, we need a backup QB who can still get us there--IF he's the best player available. I am always opposed to reaching for a "need" position; take the guy you believe is the best one available and better than who you currently have. I think that could happen with a guy like Nix this year. He might be the best guy available AND better than Clifford. That's the key.
crayzpackfan
February 28, 2024 at 02:14 pm
PackEyedOptimist- Okay.
SicSemperTyrannis
February 29, 2024 at 06:21 pm
There's also the aspect that coaching a rookie QB to greatness only to trade them, they become the best possible spy of GB imaginable, no spygate needed.
golfpacker1
February 29, 2024 at 09:05 am
How old is Aaron Jones again? Oh, and is his too high salary a real problem right now? What's the shelf life of RBs. GB is pushing the experation date of Jones already.
This is a ridiculous topic. We have a really good, young QB who will be getting a new 4-year contract worth $200 million soon. Teams don't draft QBs in the first 3 rounds with the idea of not playing them.
GB could be losing both starting RBs this year, so yeah, RB is way more of a need. I wouldn't call it a science project signing, but to even entertain the idea of drafting a potential 'Backup QB' is bad business at this point. We are close to having a complete roster and those 5th and 6th round picks could be another Aaron Jones or Rasheed Walker.
jannesbjornson
February 28, 2024 at 02:45 pm
If they're worried about Clifford, bring in a Veteran backup QB, like most contending teams.
golfpacker1
February 28, 2024 at 03:52 pm
"Right now, I think GB should worry a lot more about the S, LB, OL, RB, and CB room than being cute with QB science projects. This current team is setting up nicely for a very near future run while on the cusp of cleaning up our cap issues for signing a FA or two if needed to get us that one piece."
Perfectly stated Crazy. I have been going round and round with other posters when they entertain sliding position groups like DT and Edge, above the 5 big crucial needs @ S, OL, CB, RB, and LB.
I wouldn't waste a 5th or a 6th on a project QB, especially this year. There could be some really decent RB and Safety prospects, which are actual needs, still on the board. Not to mention OL or LB.
I would also emphasize the importance of the UFDA market. I was thrilled we got Cox last year, but we lag behind other teams every year with UFDAs. Safety and RB could see some guys not get drafted and we are rebuilding those two groups this year.
WestCoastPackerBacker
February 29, 2024 at 05:14 pm
What in the world would make you think Gutekunst is not both "careful and thoughtful?" Have you heard him speak? Have you seen his transaction history. He seems to epitomize both of those traits.
Drafting QBs to develop does NOT MEAN NOT "worrying a lot more about the S, LB, OL, RB, and CB."
Kind of ridiculous, isn't it, to pick apart a few comments from Gutey like he's going to ignore the needs of the team. The whole point is roster building and drafting QBs when you can is part of that, whether to play them or trade them when they are better than QBs that start for other teams.
T7Steve
February 28, 2024 at 01:18 pm
This is a good tactic to get into again.
That said, they shouldn't reach for one and have to ensure that the glaring holes on the roster are addressed and have their important depth pieces in place. We've seen what happens to a good team when their QB 1 goes down without reliable backups (see the 9ers in the NFCC 2 seasons ago.
stockholder
February 28, 2024 at 02:08 pm
Bo Nix
You know Gute will sign FAs
DoubleJ
February 28, 2024 at 04:41 pm
You would have to spend either the #25 or #41 to draft Nix. Both picks are too much for GB to give up for a backup QB.
golfpacker1
February 28, 2024 at 03:58 pm
T7, that is the #1 reason I think the NFL needs to expand to 58 or 60 man gameday rosters. 3 QBs should be a given that teams don't have to make a choice on. The league upped the salary cap by an appropriate amount finally this year, and I applaud that move even if it is 5 years late. 53 to 60 man gameday roster should be next.
It's not as if they don't have the money. But we don't need another QB.
PackEyedOptimist
February 28, 2024 at 01:26 pm
t's pretty funny that yesterday morning I tried to start a discussion about the possibility of drafting a QB, and a bunch of people jumped all over me; then Gute brought up the topic that night! :-D
I brought it up, because when I do draft simulations, most of the time several QBs are at the top of the board when pick 25 arrives.
I personally was a big fan of Bo Nix a year ago, and he had another good season this past year. I like Sean Clifford, but I think Nix would be a big upgrade. (I also like Jordan Travis of Florida State as a potential later pick).
I thought people's comments yesterday were pretty funny. I've heard people say we should pick one of the top WRs if they drop to us, despite our depth there, yet QB, which is far more important, is not worth a high pick? Or a pass rushing EDGE when we have three or more starter-quality guys already, but not QB?
Keep in mind the trade value of a QB who does well in the preseason, as well.
DoubleJ
February 28, 2024 at 01:37 pm
You only play one QB at a time and assuming the game isn't a blowout or injury the only player getting snaps in QB1. That is different at WR and Edge. Now I am not going to say that the Packers should draft a WR in R1, even if a top one falls. The value for WR in R1 is almost the same as the value of R1 RBs. Since 2010, there have been more WRs drafted in R2 that made the Pro Bowl than R1. There has only been 1 fewer WRs drafted in R3 to make the Pro Bowl than R1. Therefore the value for WRs is in R2 and R3. Edge though is a place where you often don't get good players outside of R1. I could see drafting an Edge player because Smith is 32 and at best in his last year with the team. This would allow a "red shirt" year for the new player to learn and then in 2025 the Packers could still have a nice rotation.
I do like the idea of drafting a QB. However, using a R1, R2, or R3 on one when you have a young franchise QB doesn't make sense. It would be a waste of value IMO. This is different than 2020 when Love was drafted because Rodgers was 36 at the time and probably only had a couple more years of top end play left.
PackEyedOptimist
February 28, 2024 at 01:40 pm
QBs get injured ALL THE TIME. Ask Minnesota et al if they wish they had a starter-quality backup last year.
(and look at Taysom Hill if you think you can't platoon QBs...)
Now, if there isn't a QB at the top of their board when their pick comes up, I absolutely would not draft one high. But IF ONE IS, they should pick him. That's how you win at the draft.
DoubleJ
February 28, 2024 at 01:51 pm
"Now, if there isn't a QB at the top of their board when their pick comes up, I absolutely would not draft one high. But IF ONE IS, they should pick him. That's how you win at the draft."
If that happens, say Jayden Daniels has a Rodgers level fall, there will be a lot of teams calling the Packers to get that pick. They could get a player + picks, they could get a boat load of picks this year, or say an early R2 + 2025 R1 from a bad team. That is how you win the draft. The only reason you would take Daniels is if you think he might be better in 3 years than Love is right now. Considering we saw how good Love could be, and it sounds like they think he could be even better than that, you would be foolish to draft the QB and instead move back and get more picks or current players.
crayzpackfan
February 28, 2024 at 02:10 pm
DoubleJ - Perfectly said. Thank You
golfpacker1
February 29, 2024 at 09:12 am
That would be the right move to make. Trade back for a surprise boatload of good draft capitol. This scenario could happen if Mcnamara, Nix, or Penix are still there @ #25. We are in a perfect spot to grab someone @ a position of need, who fell to # 25, or fleece some team who wants to move up.
PackEyedOptimist
February 28, 2024 at 02:14 pm
Oh, I would have NO problem with trading the pick if someone offered a good deal. I completely agree that that is the best outcome, but that is out of the Packer's hands, there isn't always someone who sees that player with the same value. If no one offers a good deal, then it's back to my premise: pick the best guy available who is better than whoever you have on your team in that position (backup QB in this case).
DoubleJ
February 28, 2024 at 02:38 pm
In that case I would go with the 2nd best available on my draft board. First you would be alienating your current QB who looks to be a franchise QB. Remember the Packers cannot sign Love to an extension until May which is after the draft. You could be in a situation where if you want to keep Love you will have to pay him beyond market value then; this is what happened to the Packers just a couple years ago. Or you have to franchise him and hope he signs a new contract OR that Daniels is a for sure franchise QB and someone will give up a truck load of picks for Love. Second you have a young QB so using an R1 on another QB is a waste of a pick. In 2008 the Packers drafted Brian Brohm and Matt Flynn. This was before the Packers were 100% sure that Rodgers was their man. I would have been all for Gute drafting Will Levis (the only R2 QB in 2023) in R2 had he fallen to them. It would have been a very 2008 scenario for Love. However, it is now 2024 not 2023 and we have seen what Love can do. Therefore you are better off getting QBs in R4 (maybe far end R3) or later as competition for your backup spot and possible trade asset in the future.
PackEyedOptimist
February 28, 2024 at 04:08 pm
I respectfully (🙂) disagree. I don’t believe a high quality backup at the most important position on the team is a “waste.”
I definitely wouldn’t worry about alienating Love. He’s a big boy.
(And the downvote isn’t from me— I don’t give downvotes)
DoubleJ
February 28, 2024 at 04:36 pm
"I definitely wouldn’t worry about alienating Love."
It should be something to worry about. A young franchise QB is something you don't want to mess with. Love could decide not to resign in May or even worse is he could be a problem and force a trade. Sure you might be able to get decent compensation for him from another team, however, you might be set back years if the guy you draft isn't a franchise QB.
I do agree that having a quality backup QB is nice. Hopefully Clifford is that. That said spending a day 3 pick on another QB will increase competition and hopefully make both better.
I know you didn't give the down vote. I'm sure it was give by stockholder. He realized that I wouldn't back down from his BS on a different thread and now will down vote anything I post as a vendetta of his.
golfpacker1
March 01, 2024 at 11:13 am
Waste is a strong word. I would just call it a really poor choice of a draft pick. Because there is a 100% chance he won't play for 4 years. # 25 is too valuable to waste on a non-impact starter. So is 41, 58, 88, 91, and 128.
Yes, I definitely would not want to rock the boat with our new FRANCHISE QB. Why would you, in a million years, take a chance with that reaction. Do you want to start over again @ QB when we are so close to being, I'll say it, a contender.
It is good business to look at another developmental backup QB though the draft later in the draft, NEXT YEAR. We still have plenty of big needs that we should not waste a higher pick or a lower pick. This conversation is foolish and dangerous.
SicSemperTyrannis
March 03, 2024 at 01:55 pm
Clifford kept Will Levis off the field.
golfpacker1
February 28, 2024 at 04:19 pm
Best Player Available is overrated and not what GB should do this year. We are not good enough, yet. The 2025 NFL draft could be, depending on what our 2024 season looks like, and we determine what we need to take the next step..
Coldworld
February 28, 2024 at 05:34 pm
There is seldom a single best player available in the pure sense, at least after the first few picks. After that it comes down to a needs and preferences valuation absent a spectacular fall. It’s a much muddier decision than BPA suggests.
There is also the overall return issue or anticipated marginal improvement. If, for example, we think a WR is the best player, however goid how much better do we get this year and next? Is that better than taking a ILB or DB who we have as almost as impactful? What about trading back and maybe we can add another pick as insurance? Not all will work out. An extra OL or S, for example, might be the difference this year as the season progresses.
It’s not that simple, that’s why GMs and s counts perennially struggle. Personally, if it’s a WR or QB in rounds 1 through 3, I’m looking to trade down this year. We have a lot of needs that I wouldn’t mind doubling up on to increase the chance of a find.
golfpacker1
February 29, 2024 at 08:33 am
They are called "backups" for a reason. Because they are not good enough to be starters. We have a typical, already young, backup QB. We also already have a potentially great, young QB who will soon be paid $50 million per year.
Above all else, GB does not want to spend a day 1 or day 2 pick on a position that you can't upgrade. We are close to being a contender if we fix the problems and weak position groups first.
You don't "win at the draft" by wasting picks on players that won't play.
golfpacker1
February 28, 2024 at 04:12 pm
Any first-round pick should be made with the expectation that that player is going to be a starter and big contributor. I like Bo Nix a lot also, but not to pick @ #25 so he can sit behind a very young guy we are going to give $50 million a year really soon.
I am excited to see which players, at positions that we actually need, and could actually start and contribute, will fall to us @ #25. I would not consider a QB, WR, TE, K, DT, or Edge for that pick unless you can guarantee it will be the second coming of: Payton Manning, Megatron, Tony Gonzalez, Adam Vinatieri, Aaron Donald, or Lawrence Taylor.
We have strong needs @ S, OL, CB, RB, and LB in 2024.
stockholder
February 28, 2024 at 01:48 pm
As long as Tom Lovat backs it.
Go for it
JQ
February 28, 2024 at 02:21 pm
The Packers will know about their comp picks soon, so they'll have extra picks probably on day 3 of the draft.
I'd be surprised but not shocked if they used a premium day 2 pick on a QB. But in light of Gute's comments day 3 seems more likely to me. If a QB they like drops into the 4th or 5th round, why not invest a pick?!
If Cameron Ward hadn't changed his mind about declaring I think he'd have been an exciting player to develop.
-JQ
golfpacker1
February 28, 2024 at 04:23 pm
If Joe Milton-Tennessee or Austin Reed-Western Kentucky were still available in the 7th round, I would probably pick them. But not if Isaac Guerendo-RB Louisville was still on the board.
SicSemperTyrannis
March 03, 2024 at 02:03 pm
Guerendo may be the first RB picked.
SicSemperTyrannis
March 03, 2024 at 02:02 pm
Why not? Last preseason MLF talked about it being hard to get enough reps for 3 QBs, and we have 3 very good ones who already have a year in the GB system.
Will that get outweighed by talent available? Hellifino, that good Italian;)
Packitin
February 29, 2024 at 07:17 am
"Hasselbeck, drafted in the 6th round was traded to Seattle for the Packers to jump 7 picks in the first round to 10th overall as well as collect another 3rd round pick in the process. "
This would be more impressive had the Packers not used #10 on mega-bust Jamal Reynolds, while the Seahawks selected HOF guard Steve Hutchinson at #17...
And then used the #3 on Bhawoh Jue...
PatrickGB
February 29, 2024 at 08:09 am
Competition is always good. And it’s nice to have a good scout team QB. Also, another set of eyes on the field can help at that position. I just would not draft one high if there is a better player available.
T7Steve
February 29, 2024 at 09:30 am
"if there is a better player available"
Make that a "better player and/or player of need"
golfpacker1
February 29, 2024 at 09:25 am
How long ago was the Hasselbach trade situation and how often does it happen like that? Pretty few and far between. Like once in 30 years?
So, the idea is to waste a high draft pick on a player that won't play and hope we get back better compensation years later in a trade? That's probably got about 3% chance of happening.
Either I am missing something, or this is turning into Bizzaro world. We are really close to being a pretty good, maybe a championship contending team. Let's fill the biggest holes that will complete our roster, because wasting a higher draft pick on a 2nd or 3rd string QB sure won't get us any closer.
T7Steve
February 29, 2024 at 09:33 am
I think (like last season) it would be a day 3 pick for competition and a camp arm. That pushes Clifford for the game day backup spot which is very important.
golfpacker1
February 29, 2024 at 04:41 pm
We should have grabbed the guy the Bears picked up as a UFDA instead of Clifford. Tyson Bagent was a record setting small school QB from Shepard College. He actually played a few games last year when Fields was hurt and played OK for a rookie.. He has more talent than Clifford.
Bagent played D2 football. He threw for 17,000 yards and 159 TDs. That was our developmental QB to sign.
The Packers do a so-so job of working the UFDA market. Cox was a good get last year, but most of the NFL outworks us after the draft. We need Safeties and Running Backs and there will be some talent that doesn't get drafted.
SicSemperTyrannis
March 03, 2024 at 02:08 pm
UDFA is a bad route as compared to the draft.
WD
February 29, 2024 at 10:36 am
Let's be brutally honest. The first step to solving a problem is to admit there is one. The position that needs competition is Kicker. There are 3 or 4 highly rated kickers that will be in the draft. They are predicted to go in rounds 5 to 7. Currently we have one kicker. We are set at QB. In an emergency (God forbid) you can sign one off the street. For competition's sake you could sign a free agent after the draft. I would strongly suggest drafting the top Kicker with our 5th round pick. I think he is the one from Alabama. We do remember the final game with our kicker missing the field goal late in the 4th quarter that would have put us up by a touchdown? Don't we?
T7Steve
February 29, 2024 at 10:41 am
They did sign another kicker. Can't remember his name, but someone here will.
SicSemperTyrannis
March 03, 2024 at 02:09 pm
We currently have 2 kickers, including the one who was the best of Carlson's class.
golfpacker1
February 29, 2024 at 04:48 pm
The kicker we signed is Podlesny from Georgia, he was a top 5 college kicker in 2022. Does not have a super strong leg and had multiple good seasons with a very good program.
There are 3 good ones from the 2023 class we could sign.
Will Reichardt-Alabama-what more do you need to say, it's Alabama
Josh Harty-Stanford-Had a 60 yard FG in college and very consistent
Harrison Mevis-Missouri- set SEC record with 63 yard FG and consistent
All 3 kick the ball out of the end zone on kickoffs and don't miss extra points.
CanPackFan
March 01, 2024 at 04:58 pm
Boy, Hundley sure was a dud! Drafting a QB is a hit or miss artform for sure. I feel it's more about the strengths of the player and most importantly, how they are developed.
Look at guys like Justin Fields. He was a running QB - and still basically is a running QB. GB would never have drafted him because they want QBs who throw first and run only as a last resort.
Brady was what, a 4th or 5th pick? Was he a running QB? No. Find a guy who can throw, develop him and be patient...