Interesting Read
http://www.packersnews.com/story/spo...on/1030792001/
Printable View
Interesting Read
http://www.packersnews.com/story/spo...on/1030792001/
I like the idea that McCarthy and Rodgers were against Ball because he basically would have followed Ted's rotten way of doing things. Hopefully that is true and Gutekunst is aware of it , and thus, is under pressure to go after some decent free agents.
- I must not be part of the Packer fan base, I guess.Quote:
"The first two weeks of this offseason haven’t turned the fan base against the Packers the way the summer of 2008 did"
People with tens of thousands of posts on a Packer fan forum are not typical of the Packer fan base. I don't have access to the article so I don't know what they're saying. But I think an awful lot of Packer fans are glad some changes are being made. Even most Thompson supporters were resigned to the idea that Thompson's tenure was coming to an end. This is nothing like 2008 to most people.Quote:
Originally Posted by mraynrand
"The first two weeks of this offseason haven't turned the Brett Favre fan base against the Packers the way the summer of 2008 did"
This is what the article should have said to be correct.
You need a website: http://firemarkmurphy.usQuote:
Originally Posted by mraynrand
I just don't see the connection between Ball's reputation and his work.
First, no one wanted him because he was Murphy's bean counter and an admin side only guy. Murphy was going to hire him because he kept giving him more work to do on the business side, more pay and titles. And that they probably were probably in love. Everyone complained that he wasn't a scout.
Later the story became McCarthy (then Rodgers) and fit and the problem here is that he was Ted Jr. Not only Ted Jr., but its hinted that he really was a power behind the throne, doing Ted things while Ted was singing Daisy in his office. Oh and by the way, ignore the FA binge last year, he is really just as against FA as Ted.
Neither of these story lines is compelling, complete or backed up by much reported fact. Actually, the first at least makes a modest amount of dumb sense. Many here think the GM has to be a scout because of the draft. I bet each scout and coach in the building agrees. This contravenes what we actually know about GMs, that their decision making is the key, not their scouting eye.
Whenever I read incomplete theories, my instinct from consuming too much news over the years is to assume everyone is simpler than the grand schemers that these theories assume.
McCarthy was angling for a contract while Ted was going to retire. He believes he has earned it and is mad its a one year extension. He has done the PR part of Ted's job plus win a Super Bowl and keep the whole draft and develop project alive until this year. Now he has to dump his DC. I bet there is an even chance McCarthy doesn't believe it alone will be the fix everyone assumes. He is mad there isn't more vet talent. A factor of the 2011-2013 drafts, decisions about which players to retain (which he and DC had a hand in) AND lack of FAs.
Murphy doesn't want to piss off the coach and Rodgers in the same year, so they do the extension but balk at more years that handcuff the new GM. Now McCarthy is on the hot seat and he isn't happy. The only good news is that he isn't a lame duck yet, and he can try to influence the GM process.
Did McCarthy get his GM? Maybe. Ball can't really be both Ted Jr. and Not A Scout. If McCarthy truly got his way, Murphy would have traded picks for Schneider. Or at least raised the issue with the Commish.
But by complaining and making it clear he wasn't being listened to, McCarthy now reports to the CEO and not the GM.
If I am right, the next set of complaints will be about the 90 or 53 man roster authority.
Pro tip: delete your packersnews cookies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joemailman
I just assumed the PN guys wanted Ball to become the next GM for the sake of drama and they built that narrative out.Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax
Then once they were wrong they doubled down on the story that they were right and Murphy changed his mind last minute.
I read both the theories a couple of week ago, Bretsky.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bretsky
Both theories are a nice way of getting a look at what goes on there at 1265 Lombardi Avenue.
But in the end it's all just speculation.
The closest thing I learned years ago regarding what goes on upstairs at Lambeau Field was that it's an "Ole Boy's Club."
We can speculate all we want, but those old fellers who run the Packer organization would laugh if they read some of the stuff that's put forth on the web.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/me..._dv1560017.jpg
Could be. Could also be their sources motivation too.Quote:
Originally Posted by denverYooper