Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Was Aaron Rodgers BPA in 2005?


thunderraiden

Recommended Posts

Looking back with 20/20 hindsight it is obvious he was BPA of the whole entire draft... but at the time of the draft was he BPA at the number 1 spot? And was he BPA when we picked?

They always say they look for BPA when drafting, but I strickly remember us having solid linebackers although not great, a very old QB albeit coming off a steller year (Jake had a 87.3 QB rating) so its hard to justify getting a QB in the first but when you say BPA, was Aaron Rodgers graded very high over Thomas Davis in that draft as of draft time?

I don't fault too much on Marty Hurney in the pick, Thomas Davis is great in his own right, but when they say they pick BPA and had a player with much more value than TD in 2005 maybe its a key to how we actually do pick players and can pretty much guarantee that we pick Fairley.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They always say they look for BPA when drafting, but I strickly remember us having solid linebackers although not great, a very old QB albeit coming off a steller year (Jake had a 87.3 QB rating) so its hard to justify getting a QB in the first but when you say BPA, was Aaron Rodgers graded very high over Thomas Davis in that draft as of draft time?

Jake was only 30 years old at the time and had 29 TDs the previous year without Steve Smith. 23 other GMs passed on Rodgers and several of those teams needed quarterbacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking back with 20/20 hindsight it is obvious he was BPA of the whole entire draft... but at the time of the draft was he BPA at the number 1 spot? And was he BPA when we picked?

They always say they look for BPA when drafting, but I strickly remember us having solid linebackers although not great, a very old QB albeit coming off a steller year (Jake had a 87.3 QB rating) so its hard to justify getting a QB in the first but when you say BPA, was Aaron Rodgers graded very high over Thomas Davis in that draft as of draft time?

I don't fault too much on Marty Hurney in the pick, Thomas Davis is great in his own right, but when they say they pick BPA and had a player with much more value than TD in 2005 maybe its a key to how we actually do pick players and can pretty much guarantee that we pick Fairley.

Brett Favre had about a 92 QB rating in 2004, he just played an awful playoff game but at that point he had shown no signs of slowing down, besides his usual flirtation with retirement

i don't know if we even re-sign Davis. He's missed a season and a half of action, we're working on a huge extension for Beason, why would we want to give 7 figures to Davis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Would Morgan or Beason have been HOFers' if injuries hadn't derailed their careers?  I was not a close watcher of the game when Morgan was in his prime but I thought Beason had a few seasons at close to Lukes' level of play.
    • Franchise QBs feast when things are rolling and the tide that raises boats when things are going sideways.  Bryce isn't that. He's a complimentary player, that's it.  When the defense and STs are on point, he plays loose and it shows.  When we are in a dog fight and things haven't gone our way, he struggles.  It's that simple. He's not a horrible QB, but he's not top tier either.  So the question begs, is this worthy of a second contract?  The answer should be no.  It definitely is my answer. Bryce will never be a QB that can produce wins largely on his arm.  That's a FRANCHISE QB, any other QB is simply a placeholder at the starter's position until that guy can be found.   At some point the excuses of lack of weapons will be a straw man.  Heck, it's nearly there now.  I mean if he doesn't look even better than last year will we blame it on the TE position?  'Well if Bryce only had a player like Kelce, Kittle or Gronk on this team...'  Are we really going to do that?  
    • When I arrived at college, I was 18, not too much younger than some of these draft picks.  It was not a huge school, but there were guys on the team who were 21, 22, 23....playing ahead of me.  I was seventh on the depth chart.  Those guys have been through a few seasons, were stronger, more knowledgeable.  I was a better raw player than some of them, but those other factors matter.  As I grew stronger, more familiar with the playbook, and learned what it was like to play in college, I gradually improved and with that, I rose up the depth chart.  It took most of my freshman year for the light to come on.  Had the coach thrown me into the starting lineup day 1, I would have probably failed.    And that was college.  So I agree with you based on my experience on a much lower level.  Frankly, I think that is why so many kids drafted to fill huge gaps bust.  The teams are desperate.  Anyone who looks to fill vacancies in the starting lineup through the draft is desperate.  You draft depth to develop.  For this reason, I say, "Let Walker start for a while."  Maybe Brazzell can be our WR 4.  Throw Hunter into a rotation and ask him to do one or two things.  Freeling needs some strength and he needs to work on run blocking.
×
×
  • Create New...