Draft Grades: Packers’ Pick Not Universally Loved (or Hated)
GREEN BAY, Wis. – Admit it, you love draft grades. You know, at their root, they are irrelevant at best and stupid at worst. But you love them, anyway.
As you’d expect, the grades are all over the map for the Green Bay Packers’ stunning decision to draft Utah State quarterback Jordan Love in the first round on Thursday night. Batting leadoff is Sports Illustrated’s Andy Benoit, who gave Green Bay a “B.”
As part of his analysis, Benoit wrote: “Love has first-round tools, but inconsistent mechanics plagued him at Utah State, as did bizarre bouts of poor field vision. The Packers feel they can clean that up. Mechanics rarely get corrected once a guy reaches the NFL, but one of LaFleur’s specialties and greatest passions is teaching the details of throwing mechanics, and Love is in the unusual position of a first-round quarterback being groomed behind a superstar QB who likely still has multiple years of greatness left in him.”
Sticking with the home team, SI.com’s Conor Orr called the Packers a draft “loser.” As part of his analysis: “The shift to general manager Brian Gutekunst was supposed to signify a pivot toward maximizing Rodgers’s remaining years via free agency and the draft. Instead, they selected his replacement just a few months after the Packers were exposed in a playoff loss to the San Francisco 49ers.”
NFL.com’s Chad Reuter: A-minus. As part of his analysis: “I believe Rodgers has at least a few more years of high-level performance in him -- should they have selected someone to help Rodgers excel during that time? Some Packers fans will think so. However, Love could help Green Bay win games over that span if Rodgers gets hurt again. Plus, there wasn't great value at receiver at the end of the first round.”
CBS.com’s Pete Prisco: D. Prisco called it a terrible move. As part of his analysis: “You’re on the cusp of getting to a Super Bowl, get Rodgers some help.”
Sporting News’ Vinnie Iyer: D. As part of his analysis: “In an NFC where the 49ers, Buccaneers and Saints are in win-now mode, the Packers trading up for a potential successor to Aaron Rodgers makes little sense.”
Eric Edholm, Yahoo: B-minus. As part of his analysis: “The cost for the Packers to move up wasn't high, and our 31st overall prospect – now a potential heir to Aaron Rodgers – is an extremely gifted (though flawed) passer.”
Luke Easterling, USA Today: C. As part of his analysis: “Love is loaded with potential, but it’s going to take some time. He’s in a great spot in Green Bay, but I just wonder if this pick wouldn’t have been better used to help Rodgers instead of replacing him.”
The Athletic’s Sheil Kapadia: B-minus. As part of his analysis: “I thought Green Bay would enter this draft in “win now” mode and look to add talent around Aaron Rodgers, who is 36. Instead, they’re hoping they found Rodgers’ successor.”
Nick Farabaugh, Pro Football Network: No grade but a “loser.” As part of his analysis: “I do not think the Packers were the team that should be doing this right now considering where they are at with Aaron Rodgers. To come off of an NFC Championship appearance and be just a few pieces away from a Super Bowl only to pass up on helping your current franchise quarterback is a questionable decision at best.”
ESPN.com’s Rob Demovsky: No grades, but here’s part of his analysis: “How will Rodgers react? Not only did the Packers not get Rodgers an offensive star in the first round -- and Rodgers watched division-rival Minnesota take receiver Justin Jefferson at No. 22 -- but they didn't get a player who will help Rodgers immediately.”
Ben Linsey, Pro Football Focus: No grades, but listed Aaron Rodgers as a “loser.” As part of his analysis: “We all thought the Green Bay Packers were going to go out and get Rodgers a weapon in the passing game — another wide receiver to pair with Davante Adams and give the Packers more bite on offense. Instead, they gifted Rodgers a backup quarterback, something that surely won’t alienate him or make him angry.”
RELATED: LOVE READY TO LEARN BEHIND RODGERS
RELATED: GUTEKUNST MAKES ‘LONG-TERM DECISION’
