The Green Bay Packers finally did it—after more than two decades of avoiding wide receivers in the first round, they broke the streak by selecting Matthew Golden out of Texas. But did the bold move pay off in the eyes of draft analysts? The reviews are in, and the reactions range from cautious optimism to outright skepticism.

Analyst Grades and Takeaways

Bleacher Report: C+

Kristopher Knox praised the Packers for prioritizing weapons for Jordan Love—highlighting Matthew Golden’s speed and potential as a No. 1 receiver—and for bolstering defensive depth. However, they questioned the reach for Anthony Belton, the lack of early cornerback help, and whether the draft will lead to meaningful improvement in the passing game.

CBS Sports: B-

Chris Trapasso liked the Packers’ pick of Brinson late in the draft, calling him their best value. He questioned the early selection of Belton due to technical flaws but acknowledged Green Bay’s strong track record with O-line development. He also noted the receiver room is now crowded with stylistically different additions in Golden and Williams.

Fox Sports: B

Rob Rang praised the Packers for landing speedster Matthew Golden, calling him a perfect fit to elevate Jordan Love's offense. He also liked the added size and versatility from picks like Williams, Belton, Sorrell, and Brinson, noting the team’s focus on physicality in the trenches.

NBC Sports: C

Connor Rogers viewed Matthew Golden as a solid No. 2 receiver with strong route running and highlighted Collin Oliver’s upside as a pass rusher. He raised concerns about Belton’s pass protection and questioned Savion Williams’ fit, noting he looked more like a runner than a polished receiver.

NFL.com: A- (Day 1: A, Day 2: B, Day 3: B+)

Chad Reuter liked drafting Golden as a needed deep threat for Jordan Love. He viewed Belton as a gamble and saw value in picking Savion Williams. Reuter liked the defensive additions—Sorrell, Oliver, Brinson—for their physicality, and highlighted late moves to shore up the secondary and interior line.

PFF: B-

PFF credited the Packers for giving Jordan Love a true weapon in Matthew Golden, who combines elite speed with strong hands and contested-catch ability. They liked Belton’s pass-blocking production and viewed Williams as a physical receiver despite drop concerns. Defensive picks like Sorrell, Oliver, and Brinson were seen as solid depth adds with good pressure production, while Robinson and Williams added value late in the draft.

The Athletic: 20th out of 32

Dane Brugler didn't give a graded but ranked the Packers in the bottom half of the league. He loved that the Packers finally drafted a first-round receiver in Matthew Golden, praising his route running and ball skills. He also highlighted Barryn Sorrell as a Day 3 steal, citing his strength, movement skills, and leadership potential.

Yahoo Sports: B

Nate Tice and Charles McDonald of Yahoo liked the Packers' focus on playmakers—Golden adds big-play ability, and Belton brings O-line flexibility. They questioned Golden’s size and noted Savion Williams may be more of a gadget player than a polished receiver.

Common Praise

• Matthew Golden pick widely liked: Most analysts viewed Golden as a strong addition and the right move to support Jordan Love. His speed, route running, and contested catch ability were highlighted.
• Jordan Love support acknowledged: Nearly all pundits noted the draft’s clear intent to build around QB Jordan Love, especially with WR picks.
• Defensive depth picks appreciated: Many liked the physical traits and upside of later defensive picks—especially Brinson and Sorrell.

Common Criticism

• Anthony Belton seen as a reach: Multiple analysts (Bleacher Report, CBS, NBC, NFL.com) questioned the value of taking Belton in Round 2 due to technique or speed issues.
• Savion Williams' fit questioned: While recognized for physical tools, several (NBC, Yahoo, Bleacher Report) doubted whether he was a refined enough receiver or just a gadget option.
• Lack of early cornerback help: Bleacher Report and NFL.com noted that the Packers waited too long to address the secondary.

Disagreements

• Draft value vs. need: NFL.com gave high marks for filling needs and praised the overall haul, while The Athletic and Bleacher Report were more skeptical about whether the class will move the needle.
• Belton’s upside: PFF and FOX Sports noted strong production and traits, while others like CBS and NBC were more critical of his technique or fit.