Inbox: That's exactly what happened

[Cheesehead]

Matt from Fort Worth, TX


In your opinion, what was the biggest surprise of the night?


For me, there were three. The Notre Dame linebacker, Owusu-Koramoah, not getting drafted in the first round. The Eagles, for the second straight year, spending a first-round pick on a small receiver. And Virginia Tech tackle Christian Darrisaw lasting until the 23rd pick. That worked out exceedingly well for the Vikings to trade back nine spots, get some extra picks, and still get Darrisaw.


Chase from Minnesota City, MN


A TE with the fourth pick? Given Atlanta's track record (Julio Jones), that probably shouldn't surprise me, but it does.


It was unusual for a tight end to be considered the best (non-QB) offensive player in a draft, but the opinion seemed rather universal.


Andrew from Simi Valley, CA


There is no doubt that not having No. 69 on the field impacted the NFC Championship; but he didn't give up a touchdown before half time or fumble the ball right after the half or drop a two-point conversion or get called for pass interference. A lot of other things went against us and we should have been able to win without him.


I wholeheartedly agree, and have said as much before. This all started with someone asking me if I thought the Packers win the game if Bakhtiari is healthy. I said yes. That was it. And for those who don't know me well enough, I absolutely caught the "Fletch" reference the other day. I would never miss a "Fletch" reference. Why do you think I posted it? But that doesn't change the fact that the submission didn't actually make sense. OK, time to move on, on both fronts.


Christopher from Frederick, MD


Which would you prefer: another season of "The Newsroom," or a sequel to "Draft Day"?


Wes may differ here, but give me "The Newsroom" in a heartbeat. I would think a sequel to "Draft Day" would be almost impossible. If you make it more realistic, it would be boring, and you can't make it more outrageous, right?


Joel from Green Bay, WI


Good morning! The Packers currently have 72 players under contract, meaning they can add 18 this week without cutting anyone they already have. Assuming they add 10 players through the draft, and given the UDFA signing bonus pool limit of $160,000 per team, do you think it's to the Packers' advantage to only be able to add eight UDFAs, as they could offer higher signing bonuses to get the "cream of the crop," versus a team signing 20 UDFAs?


Given the considerably smaller volume of players in this draft pool, the math says the UDFA crop won't be as strong as it normally is. I don't see the Packers handing out larger signing bonuses just because they can, if they aren't confident those players can make a legitimate run at a roster spot.


Bill from Little Chute, WI


Is the real reason GB has never formally retired No. 1 is because they need it for the first-pick photo?


After an extremely long day and night, this actually made me chuckle. Thanks.


Nathan from Delta, PA


Y'all got any big plans this weekend?


Sleeping in Sunday. Not there yet. Happy Friday.


HAVE A QUESTION?