Packers chat with Pete Dougherty

Packers chat with Pete Dougherty

Submit your questions for Pete's live draft chat Friday at noon CDT.

    Pete, at first I didn't like the Love pick, but the more I read and thought about it, the more I understood it, I think. His arm talent has been compared to Patrick Mahomes; Check. There might be no college football this year, so how do you evaluate quarterbacks next year? Check. Love will have time to sit behind Rodgers and learn, just as Rodgers did. Check. Picking 30th or even 26th wasn't likely to find a difference-maker anyway. Check. If Gutey and staff think Love has a chance to be special....well, how does he not pull the trigger? Thoughts?
    Two thoughts on drafting QB:
    1. If you believe it takes 2-3 yrs to develop a QB, then pick is perfect. We all want the Packers to be great, and if they are what chance would they ever have of picking an elite, top-10 QB like Burrow? If they think Love will be a difference-maker at some point, even a productive starter, then it was a no-brainer.
    2. Living in the Twin Cities for the past 36 yrs, my first question was "Why didn't the Vikings draft this guy?" Still trying to replace Fran Tarkenton...
    Hello Pete,
    Please help me (and others) make sense of the draft pick and the trade to get there. We just lost two picks ,1 & 4 who might have helped us this year.
    Pete, does this now mean that the packers are now eyeing punters and long snappers next? You alwaychave to look to the future, right?
    Great move last night. Instead of improving the Packs chances for 2020 they wasted two draft picks. No immediate help for a team that could use a lot of help. Last year they might have fielded the worst 13-3 team in NFL history. Don't get me wrong, I loved that they were in the championship game, but did anyone actually think that they had a chance against SF?Drafting a QB certainly could have waited until next year. What a shame.
    Pete, who needs Dom Capers when we have Gutey running the draft. You heard it here first: Fire Gutey!
    Any chance Mark Murphy replaces him after this debacle?
    OK, let's get to the fun. Those questions are a sampling of the range of takes. Let me start by saying this: In a way I understand that a decent number of fans think this was a bad move, that they everything they do should be to win now while they have Rodgers. There's just not a lot to get excited about when you know the guy probably won't play for three years. And I'm not here to belittle anyone. But ultimately, I guess I don't get bewilderment and rancor There are so many reasons to justify the pick, regardless of whether it works out. The starting point is, even decent QBs are hard to find, and if you don't have a decent one, you have no chance. Zero. And if you have a good quarterback, you always have a chance. They have long careers, so if you find a good one you're set for a decade. Gutekunst has no idea whether he'll have a shot at a QB he likes next year or the year after, and if he didn't do it by then, well, the old adage that the hardest  time to find a QB is when you need one is true. Look at Miami. It has all the draft capital in the world and couldn't work out a deal to get the QB it really wanted, Burrow. Second, it's true that Rodgers hasn't been talking about retirement like Favre. But Rodgers is basically a season older (10 months actually) than Favre was when the Packers drafted Rodgers, and Rodgers has an injury history that Favre didn't. Those injuries -- and perhaps another -- are real threats to diminishing his career more  quickly than Favre's. Gutekunst has to keep that in mind as well. It's also true that Love could be a bust. But so could anyone else they drafted. It just strikes me as short-sighted to rip this pick or suggest that Gutekunst is in some way incompetent or stupid to do it. Now, if Love does bust, then criticize Gutekunst all you want for a poor evaluation. But if he really liked the guy and thinks he has a decent chance to be winning a starter in this league, how do you not take him? He can find other ways to build out his roster over the next couple months and years, including the rest of this draft. But QBs are too hard to find. I texted an assistant coach with another team this morning, asked him about the pick, he said: "QBs hard to find. They can be the future or great trade bait for future picks!" I think that sums it up pretty well.
    Cam Newton and Jameis Winston are unemployed. instead of drafting J Love, how about signing Newton and using the two draft choices more productively?
    You really can't sign Newton until your doctors get a chance to examine him -- serious shoulder and I think ankle issues. And he's going to cost a lot, hard to see how they could afford him while paying Rodgers what they are. As for Winston, this is just my opinion, but hasn't he already proven he doesn't quite have it? As for productively, picking Rodgers in '06 was the most productive selection the Packers have made since I started covering the team in '93. Who's to say this won't be a really productive pick too?
    I for one thought all along that the Packers would take Lover...there were signals for weeks that the Packers would go this direction. I think you said in the past, you don’t look for a quarterback when you need one. Is this a sign that the Packers think 1) they can’t make a legitimate run to the Super Bowl in the next year or two, 2) insurance in case Rogers has another major injury in the next year or two, 3) they think Rogers is in sharp decline, or 4) just being smart in preparing for the long term instead of short term success?
    I'd say a big part of it is the combination of the last three things. The accumulation of Rodgers' injuries make him susceptible to decline -- not saying it will happen, maybe he's going strong three or four years from now. But it's not like it's an unrealistic possibility. I don't think it means they're not trying to win now. There are other ways to build the team over the next couple years. Besides finishing out this draft, maybe Gutekunst signs a couple more free agents -- maybe Tramon Williams, maybe a one-or-two-down run stopper, maybe someone else. Maybe he makes a trade. He might have to dip into future salary caps a little more over the next year or two to add people in free agency. I don't think it's a one-or-the-other choice. In a more perfect world, of course you use your first-round pick on a guy who can help immediately, and then when you think Rodgers is done you immediately add the successor you want. But it doesn't work that way. You have to take opportunity when it comes. Gutekunst sees Love as a big opportunity, so he took.
    Hey Pete you think they were worried that Detroit would trade up from the 2nd round to pick Love? (Or may New England?) Would be awful hard to see your guy in the division for years to come.
    Saw a report that it might have been the Colts they were worried about.
    WOW, that was a shock, and to trade up for him. A story line I haven't seen is what this says about how Guety and LaFluer feel about Rodgers play last year, which wasn't very good by his standards. Do they make this move if Rodgers has a "standard" Rodgers stat line last year?
    That's a good question. Rodgers still is very much a winning QB in the league, and with a game on the line there aren't many QBs you'd rather have out there -- Mahomes, Wilson. Maybe a horse apiece with him and Brady. Watson seems to have some magic to him. Anybody else? But he's also not the same guy he was a few years ago, at least athletically. That was pretty obvious last year. He can still make plays on the move, don't get me wrong, but he's getting caught a lot more often too. I wouldn't be surprised if they think he could fall off fast in two or three years -- the injury history I mentioned before is a real thing, and they do diminish guys. You just can't mess around at QB, or you could end up like the Packers from between Starr and Favre. Or worst case like Chicago since Luckman.
    I'm curious about the need to trade up for Love. Seattle, Balt & Ten do not seem like teams that would have been drafting a QB. Maybe Ten? Any insight on that?
    Yeah, none of those teams was a threat, but somebody trading up from behind them could have been a threat. The deal tells me Gutekunst really likes this guy. Probably going to be a while before we find out if he's right.
    So what kind of response do you predict this pick will draw from AR? With his legendary eye rolls and already bad body language, I certainly don’t foresee him welcoming this new arrival.
    I have to think he's, well, this is a family publication, so I'll just say unhappy about it. I would be too if I were him. Of course he wants somebody he can help immediately. And who's going to be happy about the team bringing in your replacement? But this is pro sports, this is how it works. He was on the other side of it 15 years ago. Favre didn't do much to mentor him. I would guess at minimum Rodgers is going to be wary of the guy. But there's another side to this too. I know I read somewhere this offseason that the Patriots thought Brady's play picked up a notch after they drafted Garoppolo. Maybe that will happen here too.
    Hello Pete. I think the comparison to Ted Thompson drafting Rodgers is way off. Sure the obvious linkage is there but the difference is huge. Rodgers was considered a potential number one overall pick. He represented value. Analysts need to consider the fact that this season and possibly next season may not exist in its entirety. If so drafting Love means the Packers are truly drafting a replacement as Rodgers will be 37-38 with only a couple of years left in the tank.
    You're not the only person to voice the first part of your question, about Rodgers being the potential No. 1 pick and thus of more value. My response is, sure Rodgers was in the discussion for No. 1 overall, but he ended up making it to 24. Even though a lot of teams after about 8 or 10 that year didn't badly need a QB, they still could have been proactive and taken him (that's what Thompson did). Or a QB-needy team could have traded up from early in the second round to get him in the teens or early 20s. Nobody did. Let's not re-write history. There was a lot of skepticism about Rodgers because of the Tedford thing (none of Tedford's QBs had done much in the NFL before Rodgers), and, believe it or not, about his athleticism.
    Pete: Seems that I've read many times that Gutekunst continues to discuss watching TT draft Aaron while having a future HOF quarterback on the team. Almost seems like he was more enamored with the symmetry of his mirroring TT than making a pick to beneift the team. Your take on this feeling?IMO, the gap we saw in the NFL Championship game is becoming wider rather than a small move to narrowing the gap.
    I just think he saw quarterback as a bigger need than a lot of people, and he got a shot at a QB he really liked and took it. I mean, the safe and easy thing to do would have been drafting any other position. This took some guts in my opinion. The 49ers did lose Buckner, he was one of their best players, so that could make a difference with their defense. I think they lost Sanders too, right? So the pick they spent on him (I'm thinking it was an R3?) is long gone, and so is he. Kinlaw, their R1, is a highly regarded prospect, but -- and I hate saying this all time -- but we don't know if he's actually going to be a good player or just an OK or a bust (injury?) Most players, even first-round picks, are basically only OK or average at best. I'm really curious to see what Gutekunst does not only in the rest of this draft, but after it.
    I think there's a lot of questions regarding drafting Love because Gutey's draft record to date, although early in his career, is questionable at best. He needs to crush it tonight. What are your thoughts on tonight's picks? WR & ILB? RB? CB?
    Haven't had a lot of time to think about it yet. I mean, he has to take a WR tonight, either in R2 or 3, right? I guess if I had to bet, I'd bet ILB for the other one. Don't know how much ammo he has to make deals, all those extra picks he has are in rounds 6 and 7, they don't get you a lot of mileage in moves up in R2 or 3. And yeah, CB is a big need too. DL is in play. He's got a lot of work to do and needs to find a couple guys who can help him right away.
    Baktiari is huge friends with #12. How will this silly Love pick affect re signing him?
    I wouldn't think at all. The contract offer is all that matters there. If they offer him a good guarantee and take some of the injury risk off him with an extension this summer/fall, he'll take it.
    If Love is such a great talent. Why did his team play poorly? Generational talent (rodgers) raises play of all on offense.
    Courageous Pete? This is a huge gamble with Love. The Packers are basically telling Rogers to just keep the status quo and they have no intentions of winning a super bowl with him.
    Yeah, it took courage. He's going to catch an incredible amount of flak for this. I'm sure there are members of the coaching staff who are unhappy -- coaches generally think more in the here and now. I have no idea what LaFleur thinks deep down Sherman was clearly against drafting Rodgers). Gutekunst made a long-term decision, a lot of GMs are so worried about keeping their jobs they wouldn't have done it. The safe thing would have been to take almost any other position. Is it a gamble? Sure. But the whole draft is a gamble. If he'd done this five years ago, yeah, I'd have said it didn't make any sense. But now? Makes all the sense in the world.
    To me Rodgers got old last year. Instead of escaping the pocket as he did in prior years he would just throw it away. My question is do you think even if they do draft a wr today, they would be able to contribute? Seems to me it takes to much time for rodgers to “trust” his wrs to make a draft choice productive.
    It does take a while to develop that chemistry and trust -- you probably saw recently the stories about Brady telling Belichick he's not throwing to this guy or that guy because he doesn't trust him. So it's not just Rodgers. But sometimes they help as rookies. Samuel for SF didn't have a huge year, but he definitely helped that team. Jennings contributed immediately way back when. Seems like rookie WRs are contributing more now than five or eight years ago, I'm sure it's because of all the passing in the college game. But it's still a hard position to play right away and will be harder this year with no offseason stuff and possibly a shorter training camp.
    Picking someone who will be more helpful in the future rather than this year is a lower-cost decision if you think it unlikely that the NFL will play this year. Is it possible that the risk of not having a season contributed to the decision to draft Love?
    Just guessing here, but I'm thinking that didn't weigh into it. I get what you're saying, they might think rookies will have a diminished impact anyway, so this is a good time to pull the trigger on the QB in R1, because he's not playing for a few years anyway. But I'm still thinking this decision is all about the game's most important position.
    2nd and 3rd round picks must be players who can make a difference in 2020. These two picks have to be WR, ILB or DL, right? What other positions could get on the field in 2020 for the Packers?
    Corner could too. They really don't have a nickel back right now, and that's basically a starting position (80 percent of the D snaps). So I could see them drafting there. Though I do wonder if they'll just end up re-signing Tramon Williams for that job after the draft, or at least as the fallback for it.
    Trading up for Jefferson (WR) or Murray (LB) would have made sense. Drafting Love smells like TT all the way. Let's not forget who the real master is still.
    This will have to be the last question everybody, don't have time to do 2 hours on back-to-back days, my apologies. Have things to do to get ready for tonight. Trading up for Jefferson struck me as odd because of the depth in this draft at WR. I guess if you have him rated a cut above, maybe it's worth it, but that would have been a head scratcher. Trading up for Murray I would have understand, but I wouldn't have given up more than an R4. Too many other needs. And with that we'll call it another chat. Can't thank everyone enough for coming by today, really enjoyed seeing all your comments and questions, and admire the passion. There were way, way too many questions for me to get to them all, so my apologies if I didn't get to yours. Hopefully we at least addressed the main points you were wondering about, and whether you agree or disagree, thanks for hearing me out. With that I have to sign off. Take care everybody, be safe and healthy, and enjoy the rest of the draft!
Powered by ScribbleLive Content Marketing Software Platform