I’m a big fan of “starting out well, and then improving”, myself.

I don't think any team should ever waste a Day 1 or Day 2 pick on a project. Projects are late round flyers where the risk isn't so great. GB has taken too many of these "projects and I was surprised they didn't take a chance on Shemar Stewart-Edge rusher who was constantly mocked to GB. He was the ultimate 'Project" with virtually no production in college.

GB has to hit a home run with this draft, especially with no first round pick.

Welcome to the club. Now, if we can convince Gutekunst to do this, that would be nice. Also, notice that Rodgers had the benefit of excellent coaching to help him become a franchise QB. Do you believe the present coaching staff is the same caliber? Or even close? Because the coaches seem sub-par, but somehow keep their jobs despite diminishing returns.

Fact the Packers 2026 first round pick will start the season injured.

Amen.

The other point is that when you draft players that are ready to contribute, play them and let them contribute! Some draft picks have been thrown right out there (like Quay Walker and Stokes) but others like Golden, Wyatt, and to a lesser degree Cooper, have been brought along at a slower pace in favor of playing veterans. The quicker these guys get experience, the quicker they become impact players.

When I grow up, I want a job where I can suck ass for two or three years, then suddenly produce something my fourth year, then threaten to leave if they don't give me a raise.

I have been dismayed by this approach for the better part of 4 years now. Gute needs to focus on college kids who have a wealth of production, a high floor, who are smart and play the game with high effort. He also needs to stop picking hybrid players with this grand delusion of versatility of his players. Versatility should be discovered later on via really good coaching, not some grand projection prior to selecting the player.
I mean come on. Is he a safety, a LB, a big CB? I don't know, pick him in round one guys, his RAS is a scorching 9.18 and he played like a beast for 5 games his whole college career. We can virtually put him anywhere we have a need. Yeah, right up until you find out he was average at all those positions and you now have a high draft pick who's a mere role player if anything at all.
If you need an IOL, go pick the best one you can find who played IOL in college and has a lot of production. Don't pick a T and try squeezing him into the inside all the time. Those changes or experiments should only take place if the T isn't working out at T.
In conclusion, projects should be for later round picks. Players should be picked in the top 3-4 rounds based on experience and production in college with high floors and intelligence (if they happen to have a high RAS, fantastic bonus). Players should be picked to play the positions they actually played in college unless they aren't panning out there or you have depth issues throughout the course of the season due to injuries. Players picked high should be players who are coached hard with expectations that they will contribute right away or soon thereafter.
Please. We need to win titles here, not trying to win Nobel Prizes for how to turn a first round tackle into a guard 3 years down the road or turning an unproductive athlete in college with a 9.24 RAS into an all pro. It's a football team, not a high school science project.

in the immortal words of Kevin Green "It is time".

Pick the dogs who can bark now instead of waiting 3 years for them to learn how!

This is no time for the Packers to be drafting project players. They need players who can contribute in 2026 especially with their 2nad 3 round picks. There is such a thing as trial by fire. Those of us who served, despite our training, had no idea what real combat was actually like until we faced it for the first time. IMO if the Packers want their rookies to learn how to play put them out there and let them get the experience they need by playing against real opponents in real games.

Draft and develop needs to become draft and play. Thanks, Since '61

I wanted Cooper DeJean too. My wife was highly amused when the Morgan pick was announced, and I howled! Having said that, I don't think Morgan really belongs in this article. He was considered to be NFL ready to play tackle or at least guard. The problem was that the Packers already had two starting tackles, so Morgan was immediately bumped to guard, where his performance has been underwhelming. It seemed like he was actually decent there as a rookie and regressed in year two, for whatever reason.

I agree with the author's premise, though. We need impact players in this draft.

I am absolutely fine with the 'project pick' ........in theory at least.

It's an attempt to get a player with a higher ceiling than you could get going for the 'sure-thing' with top college production, but lesser athleticism. An attempt to get a higher tier player with a lower pick. It makes sense in theory, when you are always drafting towards the end of the round.

However, it has to work out over time - and the results with Gary and more recently with Van Ness have not validated this approach. The Quay Walker choice also missed, compared to LB Devin Lloyd (taken 5 picks later).

Maybe the Packers have just been unlucky, maybe they mis-evaluated the players ceiling (though Van Ness might still work out). Will they keep doing this or will they change their approach - who knows ?

I have No problem with project players.
Especially along the OL.
Tony Mandrich, and Spriggs, were suppose to be
the next franchise Lts.
So -
Why does everyone believe Belton will be the RG.?
He played 3 years at Lt in NC.
I say RG kept his feet ready for LT.
That if Morgan plays RT - As PFF grades indicate.
Tom could be your next center.
Moving Rhyan back to RG.
A position every scout said he should end up at.
Versatility along the OL must be praised.
The Ol has always had projects.
Especially with more injuries to OL now.

Not taking DeJean was a major gaffe by Gutekunst. On the level of Creed. And there have been others, but the DeJean has bothered me the most. Partly because I'm an Iowa fan, but more importantly because he was a 1st team All-Pro. WTH Brian. He was a difference maker almost every game at Iowa. A real talent not some potential talent. OL was a need as it is now, and so was/is DB, but he could have taken DeJean and taken a better, or at the very least, on par OL next. DB wouldn't be as big a need now. These blunders lead me to believe he is getting bad advice, he isn't the evaluator claimed to be, or he thinks he is smarter than everyone else. Gutekunst has made some good picks and some good trades/signings, but he has made some very bad ones as well. I'm a fence sitter on him now. He has to hit the next couple drafts with limited capital or I'm jumping over.

As for development player picks, I've posted a couple times on that philosophy nearing its end. High draft pick 2nd Contracts are proving too costly for average at best players that never truly develop either by coaching or player, it doesn't matter. Every team makes mistakes, but the ones sitting in the Superbowl usually don't, at least for a few years.

Sometimes patience rewards you, sometimes it doesn't. Two players come to mind off the top of my head...Hyde and Guy. Guy won SB with Patriots and Hyde was all-pro for a few years.
Sometimes you have to let players mentally and physically develop.
I belive two players the Packers can't give up on are Lynch and Van Ness.
JMHO

"In a city nicknamed "Titletown," you're not competing for playoff berths. You're not competing for division wins or even to just win one playoff game. You're competing to win Super Bowls."

That hasn't been the case since the 2020 draft.
If you draft for the 'future', you're not trying to win the Super Bowl.
Disagree?
If you don't draft to help that current team win now, the team that went to the NFCCG, then your priority, isn't improving that current team.
Pretty simple really.
********
As far as drafting ready made NFL starters, you CAN draft NFL ready starters, but it's rare.
(See Justin Jefferson, Tristan Wirfs, etc.).
It's been done, but for Gute, it's hardly a given.
Gute hasn't drafted a ready made starter (Sans Reed) in the first two rounds, since the 2022 draft.

Yes, of course we 'should' draft ready made starters, in a perfect world.
But drafting them and starting them when they are not ready, is slightly suicidal.
I don't know if starting rookies by 'trial and fire' is the best road to the Super Bowl.
The transition from college to the NFL takes a learning curve for most players.

Sure, some have a positive impact right away, but that's an anomaly.

I think this article overstates the concept of "project."
Firstly, EVERY draft choice is a "project." No one is EVER certain of a player's ability to transfer their college skills to the NFL, much less their health.

TJ Watt is a perfect example. I picked him that year, but I was FAR from confident in my selection. Watt was a project on TWO aspects: he had been injured a LOT in college, and he was considered a "project" (much less so than his brother JJ) going into the NFL.

I picked Nico Collins, who was a "project," but the Packers picked Amari Rodgers, who had much more production/was a "safer" pick.

Heck, I was excited about adding Tony Mandarich--he was the ultimate "safe pick" who was not just "high RAS" but completely DOMINATED in college. (That tiny RB Barry Sanders would be injured in the NFL, that egomaniac Deion Sanders was going to be a locker room cancer, that pass rusher Derrick Thomas seemed awfully light weight for the NFL...)

Hindsight is always 20/20.

This is one of the best articles on this website in a long time.

Drafting ready to play rookies is important to the Packers future now.

NFL.com shows how bad our draft was last year.

"A recent article at NFL.com ranked and graded every 2025 rookie class from worst to first, and there were NFC North bookends with the Chicago Bears on top at number one (A) and the Green Bay Packers bringing up the rear in last place (D+).

The Bears being number one wasn’t much of a surprise, since they had a trio make history, but I wasn’t expecting to see the Packers ranked 32nd, far below the 31st-ranked Buffalo Bills (C-)."

That's why we still have holes and no depth. We would do better by grabbing Jo-Schmo's mock draft and using it.