The Packers Draft... Who?

With respect to the Packer's draft: Ted Thompson seems hell-bent on trying to find 'hidden gems' to the point that he's going to reach for, and take, players far before they need be drafted. I was happy when we (meaning the Packers... when I say "we" that's who I mean) traded down in the second round because I figured we wouldn't draft anyone worth drafting in that spot anyway... why not get another guy or two? I actually felt Thompson rotated between 'good-value' picks and 'reaching' picks.

Round 1. Pick 16. DT Justin Harrell, Tennessee-- Why reach for a guy who could very well have been around at pick 47 (our second round pick that we traded out of)? Particularly with so many glaring holes at other positions (WR, RB, TE, S), why take a player at a position that our team is actually fairly solid?! This pick made no sense to me and I would have been one of those people booing had I been in Green Bay. Who knows if he'll even start, behind Ryan Pickett, Colin Cole, and 'my boy' Cullen Jenkins? Sure he'll be rotated in, but do we really want to spend the sixteenth overall pick on someone who will be rotated in?

Round 2. Pick 63. RB Brandon Jackson, Nebraska -- one draft magazine said this Junior (he left Nebraska early) was the third best Running Back in the draft. Most other mags said he was the eight best RB overall... but all agree that he can learn to be effective, particularly in the kind of zone-blocking scheme that the Packers now run. A Nebraska running back with a 'fumbling' problem? Last time I heard this story it turned out pretty good (Hint: Ahman Green). Do I think he'll start? No... he'll backup Vernand Morency aka "The Big Who?".

Round 3. Pick 78. WR James Jones, San Jose State -- Some of the draft magazines don't even have this guy listed. The ones that do say he's slow but has 'moxie'. Does that sound like a guy we should spend a third-round pick on? (Hint: No) Why do I think they drafted him? "Experienced returning punts." The end.

Round 3. Pick 89. S Aaron Rouse, Virginia Tech -- The Packers need a safety to compliment Nick Collins, and this guy is 6'4" and hits like a truck. Some say that he tries to hit so hard that sometimes he completely misses... but doesn't he sound like every other safety we've ever had? (Chuck Cecil, Mike Prior, and Darren Sharper come to mind) Some mags say he has "first-round skills" but that his negative is that people don't know if he's a safety or a linebacker. That being said, most of the elite safeties in the league today are safety/linebackers who can rush the quarterback and stop the run. ESPN also says he'll bring as much to the locker room as he does to the field. For a late third-round pick... this guy's a steal!

Round 4. Pick 119. OT Allen Barbre, Missouri Southern State -- Another guy I sometimes have trouble tracking down because he's not even listed in some draft magazines. When I do find him, they say he's an amazing athlete but is "raw." For a position (O-line) that we actually have some depth, this might not be a bad pick, as our depth will allow him to become more polished... he's just not a guy I would take in the forth round.

Round 5. Pick 157. WR David Clowney, Virginia Tech -- As far as I can tell, THIS is the guy I want... not the guy we took in round three. Lightning fast and quick, with a silly fun-to-say last name. The strikes against him are that he needs to get stronger and that he struggles with under-thrown balls. Brett doesn't under-throw balls... and I can't see him not gaining some muscle when all pro players do all day is work-out and practice. They say he has third round talent, just didn't get to show it at Virginia Tech with sub-par quarterbacks. I could see him as the fourth or even third WR by year's end.

Round 6. Pick 191. ILB Korey Hall, Boise State -- Couldn't find this guy at all. He went to Boise State, so he's at least played a couple big games in his career... but, again, nothing.

Round 6. Pick 192. ILB Desmond Bishop, Cal -- Could find this guy. He went to Cal, and they say he's a run stopper. This makes sense because he's horribly slow and probably can't cover anyone in space. But at least he can tackle... which is apparently one of his biggest strengths. He won't start... but on situations where we know the other team has to run, they say he has great instincts and may be a valuable player.

Round 6. Pick 193. K Mason Crosby, Colorado -- The best kicker in the draft. Period. Everyone says so. It may be the Colorado air in which he kicked in college, but this guy has a huge leg. At the very least, he'll make one hell of a kickoff specialist. For a sixth round pick, what a steal this guy is.

Round 7. Pick 228. RB DeShawn Wynn, Florida -- Big, slow, bruising back who they say could only excel in a zone-blocking system (which is what we run). His problems seem to be character, so I'm surprised we picked him. However, what harm does it do if a seventh round pick doesn't make the team? (Hint: None)

Round 7. Pick 243. TE Clark Harris, Rutgers -- A 6'5" tight end that they say is most like Bubba Franks of everyone in the league. He, apparently, can't catch the deep ball... but excels on short routes (like goal-line and short-yardage plays). If all they're doing here is replacing the useless Bubba Franks with a similarly useless Tight End, I'm fine with it... since it's only a seven round pick. My hatred and disdain for Bubba Franks is legendary... all I can say is that I'm sorry I don't like a guy you have to impale with the ball for him to catch it.

All in all, I give this draft a C-. I don't think we picked up a starting Running Back, we don't have a strong second/third Wide Receiver (who won't get injured), we didn't address a starting Tight End need or third Cornerback. I didn't flunk the Packers because I think we'll get at least two, maybe three, starters out of this group (Rouse, Crosby, and maybe Clowney [as the third Wide Receiver])... and maybe Harrell will start at DT, but will definitely rotate in and out of the game. But, all in all, I was not impressed. I, personally, would have been tempted to draft Quinn in the first round, since Rodgers only proved he can break his leg in his first action as NFL QB. If not Quinn, CBs Leon Hall from Michigan or Aaron Ross from Texas might have been good (since we needed a third CB) or TE Greg Olson from Miami who we'll be able to see twice a year on the Bears. Hell, I might have even traded out of the first round if I could get a 2 and a 5 or something similar. I might have even reached for a WR or Running Back who shouldn't go as high as 16, just to get that need out of the way.

In summation, I'm not impressed. Boo to my team.

Paperless Transactions... Thanks For Nothing?

I'm sure all of my readers are aware that the newest rage in billing is to go 'paperless.' Credit card bills, cell phone bills, cable bills, Bill bills... have all started asking their customers to go 'paperless' and pay their bills online. Why would they do this? Are Americans so in love with new technologies that we'll change an entire history of papered business transactions just because we can do it a new way now? Or is a paperless transaction so much more convenient that we all can't be bothered to receive something in a mail... "too much work!"?

Well, I have a theory on paperless transactions which is two-fold, cynical, and subversively angry (like almost anything I say or think):

1) Paperless transactions cost less money. Oh not for you. No no no... who cares about you? The consumer? Paperless transactions cost less money to the company. They don't have to buy paper, they don't have to pay postage to send (and return) your bills, they don't have to pay illegal immigrants to mis-appropriate the funds you send so that your bill is twice as large the next month because they put your money in someone else's account. Add all these little costs together for tens of thousands of customers every month, and you've got yourself a huge dollar amount saved by subtly forcing your customers to go paperless. Do they pass that savings onto you, the consumer? How naive are you? Of course they don't... that savings goes directly into the pocket of whatever Vice President headed up the 'paperless transaction initiative.'

2) Paperless transactions leave no paper trail to save yourself if you're screwed over. This is the main reason I will never switch. Let's say I go paperless and pay my bills online... what's to say my credit card bill won't be bigger than it should be? Even with an itemized list of charges online, not having something physically in my hands makes me nervous. Besides, how often do people skim stuff online where they would actually read something that they're holding? I mean, put more simply, if you go paperless for convenience sake, won't you eventually get to the point where you just pay it without really looking at what you're doing? Isn't that the whole point for the consumer to be able to pay their bills in five seconds? Are you looking at what they're charging you or are you just moving electronic funds from your online bank to your online bills... with no way to prove you sent the transaction electronically in the first place? If I say I transferred funds and they say I didn't, how do I prove I'm right? No, my dear people inside the internets, paperless transactions will never be done by this young blogger.