Inbox: Take all that for what it's worth

[Cheesehead]

Michael from Montreal, Quebec


Is there a scenario whereby the Packers ignore all skills positions until the third round? Wolfe quipped he would never permit "stumble bums" to protect Favre and always had depth on the D-line. Given the needs on O-line (especially if BB leaves) and D-line (run stopper) would it be too risky to rely on the first two rounds in the draft as players in these positions typically require more time to develop?


A lot to unpack there, and I won't get to it all. But Wolf admitted his biggest regret as GM was not giving Favre more weapons, so no one can have it all. And the current Packers haven't had anyone I would classify as a consistent, highly productive pass-catcher drafted beyond the third round since Donald Driver. So take all that for what it's worth.


Justin from Wausau, WI


Your reply to Dan from Minnesota got me wondering... do end-zone yards really count on kickoff returns? I know they are often counted with regard to record longs, etc., but are they kept in the actual stats? What about punt yards? Both would seem odd considering that pass and rush yards from behind the goal line do not count, as in the case of Favre's 99-yarder to Robert Brooks.


Return yards are measured from the start of the return, whether it's in the end zone or the field of play. They're treated differently than yards from scrimmage. Punt yards are measured from the line of scrimmage.


Sean from Glen Ellyn, IL


Hey Mike, I was looking at the draft order and I saw the Packers are picking after teams like the Saints and the Ravens. I'm a little confused, why are we picking after such superior teams? Is the draft order not determined by NFL pundits' power rankings?


No, for playoff teams it's determined by how far you get. The Packers were one of the last four standing, and since their regular-season record (13-3) was better than the AFC runner-up Titans' (9-7), Tennessee picks 29th and Green Bay 30th. The Saints (13-3) got the last possible pick for a wild-card loser (24th) and the Ravens (14-2) got the last possible pick for a team eliminated in the divisional round (28th).


Drake from Huntsville, AL


Mike, Wes, does the GM and staff ever revisit old drafts (3-5 years or so) to compare their draft evaluation notes to how the pick actually has performed? Sort of a lessons-learned exercise?


I can't speak to whether they have specific meetings to review the past, but anyone in the scouting business, from the college road scout to a GM, is doing that mentally on a regular basis. Scouts have incredible memories. Like any profession, they learn as they go.


Derek from Norton, KS


Darrius Heyward-Bey. What a great reminder that a great 40 time only goes so far.


To his credit, he lasted 10 years in the league, and he got No. 7 overall pick money in 2009 before the '11 CBA changed those contracts. I've always wondered, if the Raiders don't take him at 7, and Raji is not there for the Packers at 9, what would Thompson have done? Taken Michael Crabtree? Traded back to take Clay Matthews somewhere in the 20s and kept his extra third-rounder, as well as picked up whatever he'd have acquired for the ninth pick? That would have been an incredible stockpile. It's what makes the draft fascinating.


Colin from Tripoli, WI


Guys, what did you make of the Badgers' pro day? I was not surprised by Orr's efforts. And it looks like Q got his 40 time down to 4.56. I don't say this often but I think Cephus is going to be not good but great. Especially from where he will be drafted. The kid is a football player. Plain and simple. Some GM is going to look like a draft guru after picking him in the mid rounds.


Cephus helped himself considerably, and judging by what a lot of Big Ten cornerbacks said about him at the combine, I don't think he's as big a sleeper as many are making him out to be. Wherever Orr ends up, if he can make some waves as a young player on special teams, he'll have a chance to stick around.


Paul from Schenectady, NY


My understanding is that the CBA agreement, if ratified, will be in place 10 years. The average NFL career lasts what, three of four years? Doesn't it seem odd that the vast majority of players who will be subject to the CBA, and play over the next 10 years, will have NO say in the bargaining agreement or terms governing their employment and careers, which is being voted on by TODAY's NFL players?


Welcome to professional sports, where nobody ever guarantees life is fair. Long-term CBAs are good for the sport, because extended labor peace helps get those hefty TV contracts and allows franchises to plan major investments in their stadiums and such with certainty about the near future.