Inbox: That's how the Packers got as far as they did

[Cheesehead]

Daniel from Rothschild, WI


"Just in case you needed a reminder of who runs the bingo." I am stealing this, thank you very much.


You beat me to it. I didn't get back fast enough.


Nate from Naples, FL


I noticed another team's official site has an offseason feature called "Mock Draft Tracker." Can you imagine?


Speaking of stealing, it's pretty common in the click-bait world. Hijacking might be the more appropriate term in this case.


Jenn from Peoria, IL


I know that mock drafts are mostly ridiculous speculation and assumptions, but I still tend to read them at this time of year. There isn't a lot of other football coverage to read and they occasionally provide a bit of insight on potential draft picks for us or our competition. The best insight I have found is the Prospect Primers. When do those start?


Sometime around mid-March. Production on them doesn't begin until after we get back from the combine.


Tom from Two Rivers, WI


I'm 52 and have now seen more winning seasons (27) than losing seasons. There have been 21 winners since 1992, counting 8-8 as losing seasons. I never thought I'd be able to say that prior to 1992. What an incredible run of success we've all blessed to see! The 1996 team was one of the most dominant of all time. They were truly special. I'd love to see such a team one more time. What are your thoughts on how this team can get there? Obviously not easy, but what do you see?


Frankly, no offense, but you're living in fantasy land. I don't think that type of dominance really exists in the NFL anymore. No one would argue the 49ers were not a deserving Super Bowl participant and the best team in the NFC, yet they were an inch away from not even winning their own division. The 14-2 Ravens won five games by seven points or less. The Chiefs were down double digits in every postseason game. The '96 Packers won only two games with a single-digit margin, including the postseason. If you're looking for dominance like that these days, you're not going to find it. You have to appreciate what it takes to make the big plays when they matter most. That's how the Packers got as far as they did. That's how the Chiefs won it all.


Henry from Brown Deer, WI


Hi guys, not sure if this even warrants an answer. Is "Packers Daily" being offered every once in a while now? Thanks.


Twice a week at the moment. I'll have one later today.


Michael from Berrien Springs, MI


Just an anecdote. When I was in junior high, my friend and I used to shag balls, water, and helmets for the Packers players at practice. I once saw Willie Wood throw a ball some 50 yards...underhand! He was an amazing athlete.


The anecdote in Cliff's obituary on the 5-foot-10 Wood touching the crossbar with his elbow is all you need to know. Some individuals are simply blessed with otherworldly athletic ability, and they maximize on it. I watched the Bears in training camp for years in my hometown growing up, and Walter Payton would jump into almost any drill involving the ball just to have fun (and show off). He could throw it farther than any QB who ever suited up for Chicago, and he generated more velocity on long snaps than the specialists could. You know special when you see it.


Fritz from Stevens Point, WI


Broad/podcaster Jay Sorgi makes a solid case that Willie Wood is the greatest undrafted NFL player of all time. Actually, it's more than solid. A recent NFL list of the top 10 incredibly didn't even list him. Just another bad call?


Hard to say. There are now 17 undrafted players who have been enshrined in Canton, so a top 10 is going to leave off some really, really good players no matter what. As for the all-time best, Kurt Warner was a two-time MVP, so that's tough to top, but it's worth pointing out Warner went undrafted after the draft was shortened to its current length and did not feature 300-plus, 400-plus players getting drafted as in other eras.


Storm from Houston, TX


Good evening II, someone made a comment about Prime Time complaining about TOO MANY getting into the HOF. "I'll" choose to "believe" he "feels" it "cheapens" his.


Of course. That's stating the obvious as far as his view goes. But it's inevitable when procedures and voting rules change – and particularly when you have an extra committee whose job it is to substitute its judgment for that of previous selectors – the circle keeps getting wider and wider. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just very predictable. Between senior nominees and the contributor category, it's now been 15 years since Canton had fewer than six inductees in a given year. There's some truth to Vic's old-school thought that selection committees should see their jobs as keeping people out rather than letting them in. But let's be honest, that level of exclusivity isn't good for business and doesn't promote the game to the same degree. In the big-picture sense, a Hall of Fame needs a steady flow of inductees to remain vibrant and perpetually relevant. Otherwise it becomes stagnant and more of an afterthought in our fleeting-attention-span world.