Thompson Gaffes Contribute To Down Year

[Partial]

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090110/PKR07/90110030/1058/PKR01

Some interesting points.

Grasping at straws a bit, though. I can't believe Tracy White would have resulted in an additional W.

[mission]

Ive never really paid attention to the comments on that site but WOW, the level of ridiculousness is off the charts over there. I read two pages worth of comments curiously and now I feel less intelligent.

As far as the article, it's kind of stating the obvious. Corey Williams wouldn't have made *the* difference though and there are just so many contributors to SUCK this year that, well, TT is bound to play a decent role in that.

[Bretsky]

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090110/PKR07/90110030/1058/PKR01

Some interesting points.

Grasping at straws a bit, though. I can't believe Tracy White would have resulted in an additional W.


That was a Bob McGinn like article

[KYPack]

Yeah man.

Vandermause really pulled out all stops on that one, eh?

Can't help but think that TT giving the big interview to Silverstein got him slagged by Vandermause.

Supposition on my part, but I think it's somewhat valid.

[Patler]

"Gaffes" implies a blatant mistake or blunder. Something wrong at the time that a person should realize was wrong. A mistake that a right-thinking person would not make.

Williams trade - clearly not wrong at the time it was made, when Harrell was healthy, KGB was healthy, etc. and all other players from 2007 were there and healthy. Everyone felt the Packers had D-line surplus in 2007.

KGB - lead the team in "pressures per snap" in 2007, second in sacks with 9.5, second in knockdowns, second in hurries. And it was a "gaffe" not to cut him coming out of training camp, without a further chance to recover?

Moves don't become "gaffes" just because other things didn't work as planned. Mistakes in retrospect, maybe; but "gaffes" seems like a harsh term to me for the things he identified.

[Lurker64]

Yeah, sometimes you make a reasonable decision and it just doesn't work out for you based on circumstances beyond your control. Ultimately, the responsibility comes down to Thompson, since he's in charge, but any suggestions of gross negligence are entirely unfair.

[swede]

My respect for Vandermause has gone down considerably.

Was it "Bring-Your-Kid-to-Work-and-Let-Him-Write-an-Article" Week?

[Bretsky]

Well, he did bank on Harrell growing and that did not work

He did bank on KGB recovering from knee surgery and regaining his old form and that did not happen.

And he did neglect to bring in more DL help.......with the exception of a fourth round draft pick on a project not really ready to play.

TT has did a lot of great things in developing this roster; but I'm not going to be an apologist for him on the DL. He needs to fix that.

[digitaldean]

I'd have to fault D-Line issues, at least in part, back to TT.

The injury to Jenkins you couldn't project. But the Justin Harrell experiment is leaving egg on TT's face.

He does have to work on reinforcing both lines. D-Line first. There are going to be some great players available in the draft and FA. He needs to use BOTH wisely to get us back to the postseason.

As for Vandermause, I don't agree with his points. Then again, I thought he was off base as well as the consistent harping about Rodgers.

[RashanGary]

Part of it was circumstance. I think this is the exact type of situation that free agency is for. Now, there has to be a player out there who is willing to come to GB. Before that, there has to be a player out there that really fits our need and we can't sell the whole team down the river for one player, but I would think TT is going to look long and hard at DL free agents.

I think there is a greater than 50% chance that we sign a somewhat significant free agent to the DL this year. I also think we're going to lock up Jolly, Kampman, and Pickett to extensions.

[RashanGary]

Harrell was a premier type talent coming out of college. There was an injury risk, but TT will take a risk. Everyone let Adrian Peterson go because of Injury and look how that panned out for the Vikings. He was the best player in the draft. He just needed someone willing to take that risk.

Harrell is probably a bust. It sure is looking that way, but I don't fault TT for taking a risk. Ngata was a big fat injury risk a few years back that nobody wanted (and I loved by the way) but look how that panned out. GM's have to take risk. It's part of the job and sometimes they don't take any risk and it blows up in their face.

KGB blew up in his face
C Williams hurt, but it's best for the team
Jenkins injury blew up in his face
Harrell's injury blew up in his face

It all added up to some major suckage and a much declined defense from a year ago. Now he's going to have to make an effort to fix it. Don't ruin the team to fix one area, but make a legit effort.

[Lurker64]

There were a few things that could have gone right for Thompson on the DL front.

1) Harrell could have come back from injury and played like we hoped he would.
2) KGB could have recovered from his surgery and played at least as well as he did last year.
3) Jenkins could have been the terror he was in the 2007 preseason, as he plays most of the year relatively healthy.
4) One of the veteran DL (Cole, Montgomery, Hunter) could step up and become a player.
5) Jeremy Thompson could have been a pleasant surprise, and adjusted his considerable natural skills to playing defensive end in a different, less reactive, scheme.

If a couple of these things happen, we're probably fine on the DL and Thompson is significantly more in the clear. However the man can't see the future and he can't devote all of his resources to one position. So he took a calculated risk, and figured that a couple of those things would happen, and he ended up batting 0/5 and it blew up in his face. I admit that a GM who can see the future would be good to have, but other than that, I'm not sure what else really could have been done.

Anybody know offhand which DL were free agents last year that we might have signed? I looked recently, and the 2007 draft didn't really accord us many opportunities to draft a DT instead of one of the guys we got and get good value out of it. Maybe we could have taken Pat Sims instead of Brohm or Pat Lee, but it's too early to see if that would have been a good idea.

[Partial]

I actually went through and have verified you did like Ngata back in the day. Not as much as Davis :D who you ranked 3rd, but you did like Ngata.

Good job on that one. He's a good player.

One of the benefits if we switched to a 3-4 is the players that fall through the cracks. The undersized, less stout DTs typically make prime candidates to be given a chance to be a 3-4 end, and can be picked up later in the draft.

[RashanGary]

Well said, Lurker. I was really pissed at how the DL played this year. Really pissed. Looking back, I'm still disappointed, but with all Thompson has done for this team, you have to think he's going to do a damn good job straightening this out too and right now it's not all about blame. It's about "where do we go next" and nothing more in my honest fans opinion.

[texaspackerbacker]

As I have said before, if Harrell had injuries related to the torn bicep or whatever it was in college, then maybe Thompson would have been blameworthy. But since his injuries were unrelated, they were sheer luck--something that could have happened to anybody.

[Packnut]

The article was pretty accurate- that is for those of us who like FACTS. For the others who live with blinders on or love to make excuses, I can see why they would dis-agree. Also, for the record, Vandy has been one of TT's biggest supporters. It's just a case of someone having enough class to realize they were wrong in light of OVER-WHELMING evidence.

It's kind of ironic how the Thompson crowd here follows their leaders motto. Never take responsibility or admit being wrong even when the facts prove other-wise. Just keep blowing smoke up everyone's ass and hope for the best. :roll:

[RashanGary]

Well, let's see where it goes packnut. He's fixed just about every problem put in front of him. Let's see if the trend continues before we say anything more than "it didn't work out this year".

[Lurker64]

I think there's a significant difference between "things don't go your way because of some bad luck, and things that you generally wouldn't be able to predict" and "things don't go your way because if deep-seated, incurable, and systemic incompetence." It's too early to say, but I very much doubt that Thompson suffers from the latter.

I also find it virtually impossible to both complain that Thompson "reached for Harrell at 16 when the defensive tackle position was one of the deepest on the roster and we need so much help on offense" and "Thompson screwed the pooch by being negligent with the defensive line." Feel free to believe one of those things, but both are hard to reconcile. The only real difference between last year's DL and this year's DL was that Williams was gone, but Williams was pretty much a one-trick pony anyway (he was a good pass-rushing under-tackle who was mediocre in run-support.)

Sometimes smart people make good decisions and they still don't work out. Whether or not this is the case with Thompson, we'll see. It's awfully easy to kick the guy when he's down, but he's not going to be replaced any time soon so as long as he represents the Packers, let's at least hope he does a good job going forward.

[Partial]

3) Jenkins could have been the terror he was in the 2007 preseason, as he plays most of the year relatively healthy.


As I'm sure you have read, I don't like Ted's approach with Jenkins at all. The guy hasn't shown that he can play effectively when nicked up, and he has been an injury in waiting for most of his short career.

When was he a terror last year? Surely in preseason, and even early in the regular season, but all the reports that I've read have stated that the coaches were dissapointed in him, and wanted him to become "tougher" and learn to play better when nicked up.

He really didn't play great last year. Certainly he was a huge improvement over the turnstyle KGB, but he did only have 1 sack, and I can't find his hurries stats. I believe he was 3rd or 4th behind KGB and Kampman, and possibly even Williams. Can anyone find the exact numbers?

I really feel like Jenkins gets a lot more credit than due for 2007. There is no denying the talent is there. Dude was unbelievably and looked like the second coming in preseason. But so far the regular season production isnt matching his potential by any stretch of the imagination.

[RashanGary]

Right, what are the TT haters looking for here? He's fixed a roster that was broken from top to bottom and now a problem emerged on the defensive line and we want to draw huge conclusions without seeing where it goes. It's a good thing some of these people have unimportant, meaningless jobs because if some of these people were in charge of making important decisions I'm afraid this world would be a much more dangerous place.

Edit: I'm just guessing that TT haters don't make decisions that effect peoples lives in important ways because their apparent lacking mental capacity leads me to believe there is no way they could hold an important job.

[RashanGary]

Should we perform triple bypass surgery?


http://img274.imageshack.us/img274/4894/jumptoconclusions2xk.jpg

[Partial]

With the above said, I am a believer in TT. He has done a good job putting together a team to this point. I have a few gaffes :) with him, if you will.

1) I'm not 100% confident that he recognizes the value of a superstar quarterback. If I were the general manager(thank god I'm not, right? :lol: ), as soon as I realized a guy was not spectacular at that position, I would move on (either trade, cut, whatever, in an attempt to get value from that player while still searching for that special player).

2) Ted needs to improve his drafting. So far, he's been ok in my opinion. He really needed to hit a homerun on the Harrell of Hawk pick, and neither have. If he had, we wouldn't be picking 9th this year. With that said, this is the most important pick in TTs tenure because he won't have another two years to develop another top ten pick if he doesn't knock this one out of the park.

I think he has done better in acquiring players in FA(Chuck, Pickett, Chillar), and has done a great job in fortifying the special teams in years past with journeymen FA and undrafted FAs (Tracy White, Donald Lee, Jarrett Bush, Jason Hunter).

[Lurker64]

The thing is that it's way, way, way too early to determine that Thompson is either "an unappreciated genius, a true master of the art" or an "arrogant, unrepentant, colossal fuckup who has advanced only through nepotism and is concerned only with convincing everybody about how smart he is."

There's certainly evidence for both theories, but it's way too early to rationally go either way. So I think we can all get together and be unhappy about the way some things have gone, but happy about the way other things have gone, and wish Thompson all the success in the world in this offseason.

[Partial]

He's fixed a roster that was broken from top to bottom and now a problem emerged on the defensive line and we want to draw huge conclusions without seeing where it goes. It's a good thing some of these people have unimportant, meaningless jobs because if some of these people were in charge of making important decisions I'm afraid this world would be a much more dangerous place.

Overturning a roster does not necessarily mean fixing it. Change for the sake of change is rarely a good thing. And replacing one "just a guy" with another, possibly younger but not necessarily "just a guy" isn't accomplishing much either.

Ted has done an alright job so far. Truth be told, he probably is starting to feel a little pressure. After all, Murphy didn't hire him, and the Packers had so much success during the Harlan, I'm sure he's feeling like he has some big shoes to fill, and isn't going to wait forever.

That's really disrespectful ^. Most of the people that are critical of TT are pretty smart, successful people. I'm sure Bretsky, RG, etc are very intelligent people, and have accomplished more than yourself.

[RashanGary]

Hell yeah. It's like every move that doesn't pan out is proof positive that TT is the mother of all F-ups and needs to be fired. I love the, "he doesn't hit on 50% of his draft picks" argument for his incompetence.

I don't mind an article that talks about how the DL was a big problem, but I don't remember anyone seeing this coming. Drafting only 5 NFL worthy players in 4 years is an example of incompetence. Having a down year on the DL is just that. Now having several down years in a row is not acceptable at all but this is similar to having one bad draft, not 4 in a row.

[RashanGary]

That's really disrespectful ^. Most of the people that are critical of TT are pretty smart, successful people. I'm sure Bretsky, RG, etc are very intelligent people, and have accomplished more than yourself.

No, they're emotionally partial. One in love with Brett Favre and the other in love with Mike Sherman :)

Packnut, he has no excuse that I'm aware of. You're in love with Brett Favre too so you have an excuse for your blind hate (of Rodgers).

[Partial]

I don't mind an article that talks about how the DL was a big problem, but I don't remember anyone seeing this coming. Drafting only 5 NFL worthy players in 4 years is an example of incompetence. Having a down year on the DL is just that. Now having several down years in a row is not acceptable at all but this is similar to having one bad draft, not 4 in a row.

If you have a down year at your job, do you still have a job the next year?

Where is the accountability? This is the NFL.. Not high school football. Good teams don't rebuild perpetually, which is what TT seems to be in favor of with the annual roster turnover of "just guys" replacing "just guys", and rookies replacing the third year guys.

People that earn millions of dollars and are vice presidents are held to a different standard than you or I. Pretty much any way you slice it, the team that Ted is paid to assemble failed miserably this year. After coming off such a great year the previous year, he should be feeling heat right now. That is not acceptable for his team to fail. I suspect they'll bounce back pretty well next year, but if they do not there isn't a shadow of a doubt in my mind that Ted Thompson is fired if they don't go at least 8-8, possibly even 9-7.

Imagine that you're paying hundreds of millions of dollars into a big project, and the project fails. You'd be a little peeved, to say the least.

There isn't any blind hate of Rodgers from me. There isn't any hate period. There are strong convictions that he isn't going to be a star, though.

Lurker, you going to address my response to you about Jenkins?

[Lurker64]

While the "everybody must be held accountable" mantra is attractive, it's a little simplistic. Suppose Charles Woodson intercepts a ball from the endzone and runs it out in an ill-advised situation and breaks both his legs, while the entire defensive line eats some questionable shrimp they bought from out of the back of some guy's truck and end up missing the season with rare parasites, and thus the defense is in shambles. That's certainly not something you can hang on Thompson. If Rodgers, Grant, Driver, and Jennings are all injured in an auto-accident, I don't think you fire the GM for that. So the question is "where do you draw the line for the whole accountability issue"?

I maintain that's the wrong question. The GM should be replaced either when you determine the current guy is hopeless beyond a reasonable doubt, or you determine that there's somebody else available who will take the job and will immediately do better than the current guy. The latter is a high hurdle since any new administrator will have to undergo a period of becoming comfortable in the organization and really becoming familiar with the roster and so won't be operating at 100% out of the gate. I sincerely doubt that either of these situations are forthcoming. If your GM is in the top half of the league, is it really worth your trouble to replace him?

[cpk1994]

1) I'm not 100% confident that he recognizes the value of a superstar quarterback. If I were the general manager(thank god I'm not, right? :lol: ), as soon as I realized a guy was not spectacular at that position, I would move on (either trade, cut, whatever, in an attempt to get value from that player while still searching for that special player).

This is the single dumbest thing I have ever heard., What is your problem with Rodgers? This moronic statement is why I say "Thank GOd you are not the Packers GM". The Packers would never have stability becuase if the QB is not spectacular after one year, you would get rid of them". They would have a new QBN every year.

This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you hate Rodgers.

[Pugger]

Going back to the D line a big problem with it last season was the lousy play of Jolly and Pickett. How could TT foresee that? They just didn't play as well as they did last year nor could they collapse the pocket and push their guys back towards the QB. Losing Jenkins didn't help either so the only starter that played half way decently was Kampman. Harrell couldn't stay healthy (Harrell is probably a bust unless by some miracle he comes around next season - but we shouldn't hold our breath.) , KGB never came back from his injury plus Cole and Hunter missed games too. It got so bad that TT had to pick up a street FA (Pettway)! With all of this we couldn't put any pressure on opposing QBs. We gave them all day to pick us apart. Its a wonder we got as many INTs as we did! I think TT needs to get a defensive tackle AND a defensive end to shore up that line. :?

[Patler]

If you have a down year at your job, do you still have a job the next year?

Where is the accountability? This is the NFL.. Not high school football. Good teams don't rebuild perpetually, which is what TT seems to be in favor of with the annual roster turnover of "just guys" replacing "just guys", and rookies replacing the third year guys.

People that earn millions of dollars and are vice presidents are held to a different standard than you or I. Pretty much any way you slice it, the team that Ted is paid to assemble failed miserably this year. After coming off such a great year the previous year, he should be feeling heat right now. That is not acceptable for his team to fail. I suspect they'll bounce back pretty well next year, but if they do not there isn't a shadow of a doubt in my mind that Ted Thompson is fired if they don't go at least 8-8, possibly even 9-7.

Imagine that you're paying hundreds of millions of dollars into a big project, and the project fails. You'd be a little peeved, to say the least.


By your standard, every corporate executive through out the world should be in danger of losing their job following the dismal economic performance of 2008. Should they all be fired just because their companies performed poorly in 2008? Should they all be feeling the heat? Or, should the Boards of Directors consider more than just the short term results and assess the overall performance of each executive and how much the 2008 results were due to factors for which they had no control or could not reasonably be expected to anticipate?

[gex]

He's fixed a roster that was broken from top to bottom and now a problem emerged on the defensive line and we want to draw huge conclusions without seeing where it goes. It's a good thing some of these people have unimportant, meaningless jobs because if some of these people were in charge of making important decisions I'm afraid this world would be a much more dangerous place.

Overturning a roster does not necessarily mean fixing it. Change for the sake of change is rarely a good thing. And replacing one "just a guy" with another, possibly younger but not necessarily "just a guy" isn't accomplishing much either.

Ted has done an alright job so far. Truth be told, he probably is starting to feel a little pressure. After all, Murphy didn't hire him, and the Packers had so much success during the Harlan, I'm sure he's feeling like he has some big shoes to fill, and isn't going to wait forever.

That's really disrespectful ^. Most of the people that are critical of TT are pretty smart, successful people. I'm sure Bretsky, RG, etc are very intelligent people, and have accomplished more than yourself.

Now that is spot on and something people should think about!

[rbaloha1]

As a TT supporter, TT needs to be blamed partly for the bad season.

First, TT was fortunate AR lasted the season. A veteran qb should have been signed.

Second, KGB's skills were declining with a $6 million price (another stupid Sherman contract). TT could have saved $6 million and secured a veteran qb and use a high draft pick for a pass rusher. Sorry Thompson and Hunter have not consistently flashed KGB pass rush abilities.

Third, cutting Ryan was a big mistake. Poor punting caused bad field position which contributed to loses.

Fourth, signing BP to a long term contract was a bad decision. The guy may not even be start next season. Should be groomed a pass rushing specialist and special teamer period.

Fifth, releasing Abdul Hodge. Maybe Hodge and Bishop on the field together have more impact than the overrated Hawk.

Despite these miscalculations the roster is still talent. Free agency, draft picks, new DC and maturing AR leads the Packers back to the playoff.

In TT we trust.

[Lurker64]

First, TT was fortunate AR lasted the season. A veteran qb should have been signed.

This was not a miscalculation. This was a calculated risk that panned out for Thompson. I'm not sure what there is to complain about. Other than possibly the Tampa game, what would having a journeyman veteran accomplished this year?

[cpk1994]

As a TT supporter, TT needs to be blamed partly for the bad season.

First, TT was fortunate AR lasted the season. A veteran qb should have been signed.

Second, KGB's skills were declining with a $6 million price (another stupid Sherman contract). TT could have saved $6 million and secured a veteran qb and use a high draft pick for a pass rusher. Sorry Thompson and Hunter have not consistently flashed KGB pass rush abilities.

Third, cutting Ryan was a big mistake. Poor punting caused bad field position which contributed to loses.

Fourth, signing BP to a long term contract was a bad decision. The guy may not even be start next season. Should be groomed a pass rushing specialist and special teamer period.

Fifth, releasing Abdul Hodge. Maybe Hodge and Bishop on the field together have more impact than the overrated Hawk.

Despite these miscalculations the roster is still talent. Free agency, draft picks, new DC and maturing AR leads the Packers back to the playoff.

In TT we trust.I disagree about Hodge. Releasing a player who basically did nothing is not a mistake.

[Lurker64]

I disagree about Hodge. Releasing a player who basically did nothing is not a mistake.

What are you talking about? For a Cincinnati Bengals team that clearly needed help at linebacker (and everywhere else on the defense), Abdul Hodge managed to accumulate all of 3 tackles (1 solo) in six games during 2008 season. Cutting him was obviously a mistake, I mean ... look at how highly touted he was coming out!

[sharpe1027]

I disagree about Hodge. Releasing a player who did absolutely nothing is not a mistake.

Fixed. :wink:

TT deserves blame for the poor play. He also deserves credit for getting within one game of the superbowl.

On one hand TT is widely criticized for being too conservative and not taking chances. On the other hand TT is criticized for taking a chance. People will find facts and arguments to support their personal opinions especially with such a complex issue.

TT is not a good speaker and his speaking style and overall demeanor make many people uncomfortable. Does that slant people's perception of him? I think so. Look at Ron Wolfe. He was a pretty charismatic guy that was much easier to like. He also struggled early, but was given a fair shot. We should do the same for TT.

The draft-down criticism seems to miss the point. Too often the argument centers around the picks that fail. The analysis should simply be how many of the picks worked out. If a team has only three (high) picks and gets 2 starters from those picks (66%), that team is still worse off than another team that has 10 picks and gets 4 starters (40%).

Another common mistake is that people will pick the best one or two players selected between the trade down positions. OMG, if we had not drafted down we could have had player XYZ!!! Never mind that most of the other players between the picks sucked. Everyone is a draft expert looking back in hindsight, but realistically you cannot judge a draft by looking at the successful picks of other teams and ignoring all the failures.

[SkinBasket]

Fifth, releasing Abdul Hodge. Maybe Hodge and Bishop on the field together have more impact than the overrated Hawk.


There's times when you read stuff like this and shake your head. Then there's times when you gotta believe there's a brain tumor involved. This is one of the later.

[Patler]

TT was supposed to cut KGB before the season when he had not yet even turned 31 years old at the start of the season, because in 2007:
-he had his best year since 2004?
-he was 1st on the team in "pressures" per snap?
-he was 2nd on the team in sacks, 17th in the NFL, a half sack behind Tuck?
-he was second on the team in total knockdowns?
-he was second on the team in hurries?
-he had had what was expected to be a minor procedure to clean-up his knee?

Based on all those things, TT was supposed to know that KGB's performance would fall of a cliff, from very good in 2007 to nothing at all in 2008?

I suppose he should have known enough not to lose any money in the stock market either?

TT is responsible for all the player movements, I agree, but some things that don't work out are not necessarily a mistake. How angry would fans have been if KGB rehabbed a couple more weeks, signed with another team, then duplicated his 2007 performance? Based on his performance in 2007, unless medical reports were very negative, I can't fault TT a whole lot for taking a chance on KGB coming around part way into the 2008 season.










. His skills were declining

[Patler]

Fourth, signing BP to a long term contract was a bad decision. The guy may not even be start next season. Should be groomed a pass rushing specialist and special teamer period.

They can release him and avoid much of the money in the contract.
They paid him $3 million more this year than they would have under his original contract, and for that the secured another 4 years in which they have the option to keep him at fixed prices, or cut him to avoid the costs. Any year they decide he is not worth what they will have to pay him that year, they can release him with very little cap impact because most of the money came out of the 2008 salary cap..

[cpk1994]

I disagree about Hodge. Releasing a player who basically did nothing is not a mistake.

What are you talking about? For a Cincinnati Bengals team that clearly needed help at linebacker (and everywhere else on the defense), Abdul Hodge managed to accumulate all of 3 tackles (1 solo) in six games during 2008 season. Cutting him was obviously a mistake, I mean ... look at how highly touted he was coming out!Good point. I forgot how some Packer fans were already carving out his bust in Canton after the scrimmage game his rookie year.

[Guiness]

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20090110/PKR07/90110030/1058/PKR01

Some interesting points.

Grasping at straws a bit, though. I can't believe Tracy White would have resulted in an additional W.

I dunno - this is actually one of the points that I can buy into (a bit).

ST really seemed to fall apart when this guy left. And we really got hurt by some bad field position situations late in the season.

[cheesner]

1) I'm not 100% confident that he recognizes the value of a superstar quarterback. If I were the general manager(thank god I'm not, right? :lol: ), as soon as I realized a guy was not spectacular at that position, I would move on (either trade, cut, whatever, in an attempt to get value from that player while still searching for that special player).

This is the single dumbest thing I have ever heard., What is your problem with Rodgers? This moronic statement is why I say "Thank GOd you are not the Packers GM". The Packers would never have stability becuase if the QB is not spectacular after one year, you would get rid of them". They would have a new QBN every year.

This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you hate Rodgers.
The actions of TT contradict his statement. He did get rid of a non-superstar QB and went with a new guy. Even if partial thought AR wasn't a 'superstar' QB, he should at least acknowledge that TT didn't stick with a has-been but at least tried to improve the position.

If he doesn't think AR should play anymore, is one year really enough to tell? Favre himself wasn't very good the first few years. When he became a FA how many other offers did he get? NONE (to the best of my memory). Nobody wanted him and he had to resign with the Packers.

[woodbuck27]

Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:45 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Gaffes" implies a blatant mistake or blunder. Something wrong at the time that a person should realize was wrong. A mistake that a right-thinking person would not make.

Yes that means you can get a definition from a dictionary Patler. . .but

'' Williams trade - clearly not wrong at the time it was made, when Harrell was healthy,[/b] KGB was healthy, etc. and all other players from 2007 were there and healthy. [b]Everyone felt the Packers had D-line surplus in 2007. ''

Harrell was healthy? Excuse me but. . .that Implies what Patler?

That Harrell was ever healthy? You talking about the same DT that I've seen do little to nothing? Ohh wait. You realloy imagine that Ted Thompson has it? Maybe Im wrong. Of course he doesn't have it and your an intelligent gent so again I'm reallt confused by you Patler.

The Harrlell pick has certainly looked bad on Ted Thompson. Is there really anyone on this forum that can argue otherwise? That's not the issue here. It's TT and managing us to success and that means Super Bowl contender at least.

Ted Thompson. This is a man that was suposed to be the drafting genious. Look at the results he has shown over the last three year as our teams first picks . Good grief.

I know its with a hope and a prayer when any College player moves into the NFL but I see 0-3 the last three seasons for TT's first pick in the three drafts. He trades down to save his ass IMO, again, to give him more time to give himself more time too procrastinate. Ted Thompson is lost. Well he wsn't brought in to be a Packer GM in my best observationn from the beginning.There was another agenda for poor Ted.

Of course I speculate. How very bold of me.

Always safe, and add always slow to get it done? Equals our GM. That is his personality and he can't or won't get over himself or grow. Ted Thompson shows no sign of learning on the job.

Translation. He's a bust. Next season will just about seal his future as a Packer GM. In terms of anything bove mediorocity he's like a piece of clothing too long out on the line. Really dried out!

We have a fella that carries around a quote of a statement that I made. I have always thanked him for that privately. That quote is: To the effect that through the 2013 season we will not see the Packers in a Super Bowl moreso win a Super Bowl. As long as we have to endure Ted Thompson's wanna be ways to be the Green Bay Packers GM. As Packer fans we won't see a lot of success.

Now the 'D' is getting old and where are we on 'O' in terms of depth at RB, TE and on the OL. We have a decent receiving core and DD aging. We have one legitimate young star player on 'O' and two possibly emerging players.

I'm so sure that I'm correct IIll sell my soul wherever if I'm werong. I will NOT be wrong in my prediction as it's too obviously correct bsded in common sense.

I mean how n much of an analyst does one have to be to see Ted Thompon can't and won't get it done. I might add that his choi9ce of HC was another wish and a prayer that looks bad now. Mike Mccarthy isn'ty a good game management coach.

Like Ted Thompson, HC Mike McCarthy reminds me of the Frozen Food section at your local food mart. Well again the redundency. Ted Thompson brought him in. YIKES! :D

'' KGB - lead the team in "pressures per snap" in 2007, second in sacks with 9.5, second in knockdowns, second in hurries. And it was a "gaffe" not to cut him coming out of training camp, without a further chance to recover? '' Patler

Now that one above Re: KGB Patler. So much again for loyalty. KGB always tried his best to contribute. How many Packer players over the past decade have given more. The reward. See ya KGB. How many other Vet's did we see moved out this past three seasons? Any GM can manage that and manage to hang onto CAP space or be a bean counter. But CAP space doesn't bring us talent and talent wins spots in the playoffs Patler.

I will now read thyat article. I hope that the writer nails Ted Thompsons hide. He has to go or he'll set our franchise back at least two decades or what wwe didn't enjoy in the pre Favre era.

[Lurker64]

I think this is partially an issue of chicken vs. egg. Eli Manning certainly wasn't a superstar until he won a superbowl last year, and he's been a superstar ever since (though recent performances may rocket him back to "goat" status.) Realistically, "superstar QB" is generally defined as "a QB who plays for a good team and plays well." When Cincinnati was good, briefly, you could certainly make the case for Carson Palmer being a superstar QB, but would anybody make that case now?

[sharpe1027]

Ted Thompson. This is a man that was suposed to be the drafting genious. Look at the results he has shown over the last three year as our teams first picks . Good grief.

I know its with a hope and a prayer when any College player moves into the NFL but I see 0-3 the last three seasons for TT's first pick in the three drafts.


0-3? Interesting way to look at it. I would say 2-3. You have two full-time starters, one of which had one of the best first-year starting stats of any QB ever. The other has been starting since day one of his career. Sure you can argue that Hawk is not an all-pro, but anytime you get a guy that looks like a starter for your next 8 years, don't complain.

[bobblehead]

The article was pretty accurate- that is for those of us who like FACTS. For the others who live with blinders on or love to make excuses, I can see why they would dis-agree. Also, for the record, Vandy has been one of TT's biggest supporters. It's just a case of someone having enough class to realize they were wrong in light of OVER-WHELMING evidence.

It's kind of ironic how the Thompson crowd here follows their leaders motto. Never take responsibility or admit being wrong even when the facts prove other-wise. Just keep blowing smoke up everyone's ass and hope for the best. :roll:

You realize that if our kicker can make a 52 yarder indoors off turf and then another much shorter one in chicago we are 8-8 despite the problems right?? I didn't read the article, but it doesn't matter. TT has been a fricking good GM. Perfect?? Of course not.

My only big gripe with TT and MM is that the mantra of everyone being accountable and fighting for the job has slipped away as the roster is filled with their guys. I think a benching of Grant early on would have helped, and I think Clifton should have sat a bit more pine early as well. On defense they did try to move guys around to improve production, but injuries were hell.

The NFL comes down to a handful of things that are key. QB play, LT play, and DL play. In rebuilding the roster we are in some trouble with DL play and potentially LT play. We can fix some of that this year. With the 9 pick I almost garauntee a LT or DL. I think we will be in the running for any premier DL that gets to FA.

I am reasonably sure we win at least 10 games next season and maybe as many as 13 again. I'll have a lot of fun in the offseason threads predicting what we will do, and what we need.

[bobblehead]

3) Jenkins could have been the terror he was in the 2007 preseason, as he plays most of the year relatively healthy.


As I'm sure you have read, I don't like Ted's approach with Jenkins at all. The guy hasn't shown that he can play effectively when nicked up, and he has been an injury in waiting for most of his short career.

When was he a terror last year? Surely in preseason, and even early in the regular season, but all the reports that I've read have stated that the coaches were dissapointed in him, and wanted him to become "tougher" and learn to play better when nicked up.

He really didn't play great last year. Certainly he was a huge improvement over the turnstyle KGB, but he did only have 1 sack, and I can't find his hurries stats. I believe he was 3rd or 4th behind KGB and Kampman, and possibly even Williams. Can anyone find the exact numbers?

I really feel like Jenkins gets a lot more credit than due for 2007. There is no denying the talent is there. Dude was unbelievably and looked like the second coming in preseason. But so far the regular season production isnt matching his potential by any stretch of the imagination.

Really good post partial, and great new avatar too. Jenkins has immense talent and moves like a little guy in a 300+ body...but until he stays healthy is nothing more than a tease.

[Lurker64]

0-3? Interesting way to look at it. I would say 2-3. You have two full-time starters, one of which had one of the best first-year starting stats of any QB ever. The other has been starting since day one of his career. Sure you can argue that Hawk is not an all-pro, but anytime you get a guy that looks like a starter for your next 8 years, don't complain.

Yeah, Rodgers and Hawk are definitely keepers. Harrell is looking like a bust, but that ship has not yet sailed. Nelson, though not a first round pick, is looking to be a receiver who (though not a superstar) is one of those really valuable guys who does the hard, nasty stuff, which is fine because we have our superstar receiver (Jennings), and you don't need a whole stable of superstar receivers.

So in the first round, I'd say Thompson is 2-1-1 (the last one is for 'not picking in the first')

[rbaloha1]

First, TT was fortunate AR lasted the season. A veteran qb should have been signed.

This was not a miscalculation. This was a calculated risk that panned out for Thompson. I'm not sure what there is to complain about. Other than possibly the Tampa game, what would having a journeyman veteran accomplished this year?

The point is TT was lucky. To assume A-Rod is able to play the full season was downright luck.

The two rookie qbs were clearly unready. Maybe a veteran qb would have helped A-Rod in the last 2 minutes.

Next season hopefully BB or MF emerges. If not, a veteran qb should be signed.

[rbaloha1]

[[/quote]I disagree about Hodge. Releasing a player who basically did nothing is not a mistake.[/quote]

Hodge lb play and ability to play special teams warranted a roster spot over Tracy White. Hopefully Danny L turns out to be someone able to contribute on defense.

[Lurker64]

The point is TT was lucky. To assume A-Rod is able to play the full season was downright luck.

Was it lucky? Don't most starting quarterbacks who play well, play the entire season, in an average season?

Short of specific major injuries or "running QBs" how often do you hear of a good young QB missing a game due to injury? I mean, it's possible that Rodgers could have torn an ACL like Brady and he'd be out for the year, but most QBs don't suffer torn ACLs in a given year. At most one or two do.

[sharpe1027]

The point is TT was lucky. To assume A-Rod is able to play the full season was downright luck.

The two rookie qbs were clearly unready. Maybe a veteran qb would have helped A-Rod in the last 2 minutes.

Next season hopefully BB or MF emerges. If not, a veteran qb should be signed.

According to some, he should have "known" that Harrell and Jenkins were going to get hurt, but yet he was "lucky" that Rodgers didn't get hurt? No way to win with that logic...

[rbaloha1]

Fifth, releasing Abdul Hodge. Maybe Hodge and Bishop on the field together have more impact than the overrated Hawk.


There's times when you read stuff like this and shake your head. Then there's times when you gotta believe there's a brain tumor involved. This is one of the later.

Hawk was drafted at #5 to be an impact player like Urlacher. IMO Hawk's play does not match the draft selection.

Recall Moss called out Hawk. Recall Bishop in one half had almost the same amount of impact plays as Hawk for a season! The lb play was extremely average and more than likely Bishop and Hodge would have played better than Hawk. Even TT recently said he was puzzled by Hawk.

HAWK SHOULD NOT BE RESIGNED!

[mission]

[I disagree about Hodge. Releasing a player who basically did nothing is not a mistake.[/quote]

Hodge lb play and ability to play special teams warranted a roster spot over Tracy White. Hopefully Danny L turns out to be someone able to contribute on defense.[/quote]

Tracy White is head and shoulders above Hodge on STs and maybe only a sliver behind him at LB, although that's arguable.

[rbaloha1]

TT was supposed to cut KGB before the season when he had not yet even turned 31 years old at the start of the season, because in 2007:
-he had his best year since 2004?
-he was 1st on the team in "pressures" per snap?
-he was 2nd on the team in sacks, 17th in the NFL, a half sack behind Tuck?
-he was second on the team in total knockdowns?
-he was second on the team in hurries?
-he had had what was expected to be a minor procedure to clean-up his knee?

Based on all those things, TT was supposed to know that KGB's performance would fall of a cliff, from very good in 2007 to nothing at all in 2008?

I suppose he should have known enough not to lose any money in the stock market either?

TT is responsible for all the player movements, I agree, but some things that don't work out are not necessarily a mistake. How angry would fans have been if KGB rehabbed a couple more weeks, signed with another team, then duplicated his 2007 performance? Based on his performance in 2007, unless medical reports were very negative, I can't fault TT a whole lot for taking a chance on KGB coming around part way into the 2008 season.

Good point. KGB was a tough one especially when no displayed the ability to replace KGB.










. His skills were declining

[rbaloha1]

Fourth, signing BP to a long term contract was a bad decision. The guy may not even be start next season. Should be groomed a pass rushing specialist and special teamer period.

They can release him and avoid much of the money in the contract.
They paid him $3 million more this year than they would have under his original contract, and for that the secured another 4 years in which they have the option to keep him at fixed prices, or cut him to avoid the costs. Any year they decide he is not worth what they will have to pay him that year, they can release him with very little cap impact because most of the money came out of the 2008 salary cap..

Good point. Still imo a waste of $.

[rbaloha1]

The point is TT was lucky. To assume A-Rod is able to play the full season was downright luck.

The two rookie qbs were clearly unready. Maybe a veteran qb would have helped A-Rod in the last 2 minutes.

Next season hopefully BB or MF emerges. If not, a veteran qb should be signed.

According to some, he should have "known" that Harrell and Jenkins were going to get hurt, but yet he was "lucky" that Rodgers didn't get hurt? No way to win with that logic...

How many qbs last the entire season? At the start of the season there was adequate depth at dt. There is absolutely no way TT is at fault for the injuries?

At qb was there adequate depth?

[Patler]

First, TT was fortunate AR lasted the season. A veteran qb should have been signed.

This was not a miscalculation. This was a calculated risk that panned out for Thompson. I'm not sure what there is to complain about. Other than possibly the Tampa game, what would having a journeyman veteran accomplished this year?

The point is TT was lucky. To assume A-Rod is able to play the full season was downright luck.

The two rookie qbs were clearly unready. Maybe a veteran qb would have helped A-Rod in the last 2 minutes.

Next season hopefully BB or MF emerges. If not, a veteran qb should be signed.

So when TT is wrong about something he is incompetent;
but when he is right about something he is just "lucky"?

[Lurker64]

How many qbs last the entire season?

Looking at 2008 stats for QBs: Roethlisberger, Warner, Manning, Rivers, McNabb, Flacco, Ryan, Pennington, Rodgers, Eli Manning, Cutler, Delhomme, Campbell, Garrard, and Favre all had 16 starts.

Kerry Collins and Matt Cassell came in due to injuries to the annointed starters and started 15 games each.

Kansas City, San Francisco, Detroit, Cleveland, and Minnesota all had unsettled QB positions due to the lack of a clear starter. Jamarcus Russell, Kyle Orton, and Mark Bulger each missed one game due to injury; Trent Edwards missed 2; Tony Romo missed 3.

As far as I know the only QBs to miss more than 3 games due to injury this year were: Tom Brady, Matt Schaub, Carson Palmer, and Hasselbeck.

So in answer to your question, most QBs play at least 15 games if they prove competent to start.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

Stupidity makes my head hurt :( , and if that's the case some of the posts might give me a brain aneurysm. Keep up the good fight Patler, Lurker, bobblehead, etc.

[rbaloha1]

First, TT was fortunate AR lasted the season. A veteran qb should have been signed.

This was not a miscalculation. This was a calculated risk that panned out for Thompson. I'm not sure what there is to complain about. Other than possibly the Tampa game, what would having a journeyman veteran accomplished this year?

The point is TT was lucky. To assume A-Rod is able to play the full season was downright luck.

The two rookie qbs were clearly unready. Maybe a veteran qb would have helped A-Rod in the last 2 minutes.

Next season hopefully BB or MF emerges. If not, a veteran qb should be signed.

So when TT is wrong about something he is incompetent;
but when he is right about something he is just "lucky"?

Recall I am a huge TT supporter. Only on the qb situation was TT lucky. Again let hope MF or BB emerges.

[sharpe1027]

How many qbs last the entire season?

Good question. I assume you have the answer given your strong opinion on the subject. :lol:




At the start of the season there was adequate depth at dt.


Yes, that was probably the most widely accepted view of their situation at the time. People disagreeing are mostly doing so in hindsight.



There is absolutely no way TT is at fault for the injuries?


Strawman argument. Never said or meant to imply anything approaching "absolutely no way". Of course you can. I was trying to point out the double standard in the way people were judging.



At qb was there adequate depth?


One answer is yes, since almost none was needed. :twisted:

Honestly, I can't tell you for sure because we hardly got to see them play. I have little doubt that they would have struggled and been a big drop off. That being said, it is also my guess that any of the FA QBs available would have also struggled and been a big drop off.

Some teams look for years just to get one starting QB, much less worry about having a really good backup. We have a solid starter, faulting for hypothetical situations that would sink most other teams when there are bigger fish to fry seems a bit misplaced.

[Patler]

Fourth, signing BP to a long term contract was a bad decision. The guy may not even be start next season. Should be groomed a pass rushing specialist and special teamer period.

They can release him and avoid much of the money in the contract.
They paid him $3 million more this year than they would have under his original contract, and for that the secured another 4 years in which they have the option to keep him at fixed prices, or cut him to avoid the costs. Any year they decide he is not worth what they will have to pay him that year, they can release him with very little cap impact because most of the money came out of the 2008 salary cap..

Good point. Still imo a waste of $.

It could be, but on the other hand now we have to remember that, roughly speaking, the average salary for NFL players will be over $2 million/year. (53 players + IR and a few others, $120+ million salary cap). It's not going to take much of a player to earn $2-3 million after their rookie contracts are up.

I wasn't a real big fan of signing Poppinga, but after seeing the details it looks like they protected themselves. They will have an "OK" player as long as they want to keep him, and, more importantly, one they can release at any time with minimal salary cap impact.

[rbaloha1]

How many qbs last the entire season?

Looking at 2008 stats for QBs: Roethlisberger, Warner, Manning, Rivers, McNabb, Flacco, Ryan, Pennington, Rodgers, Eli Manning, Cutler, Delhomme, Campbell, Garrard, and Favre all had 16 starts.

Kerry Collins and Matt Cassell came in due to injuries to the annointed starters and started 15 games each.

Kansas City, San Francisco, Detroit, Cleveland, and Minnesota all had unsettled QB positions due to the lack of a clear starter. Jamarcus Russell, Trent Edwards, and Kyle Orton. Jamarcus Russell, Kyle Orton, and Mark Bulger each missed one game due to injury; Trent Edwards missed 2; Tony Romo missed 3.

As far as I know the only QBs to miss more than 3 games due to injury this year were: Tom Brady, Matt Schaub, Carson Palmer, and Hasselbeck.

So in answer to your question, most QBs play at least 15 games if they prove competent to start.

Good post. The majority listed have a track record -- something A-rod lacked. TT lucked out.

[sharpe1027]

Good post. The majority listed have a track record -- something A-rod lacked. TT lucked out.

None of the QBs without track records (first year starters) got seriously injured...

[rbaloha1]

Good post. The majority listed have a track record -- something A-rod lacked. TT lucked out.

None of the QBs without track records (first year starters) got seriously injured...

True. Again fortunate.

[sharpe1027]

Good post. The majority listed have a track record -- something A-rod lacked. TT lucked out.

None of the QBs without track records (first year starters) got seriously injured...

True. Again fortunate.

Rather than saying that 90% of teams were lucky, it would be more conventional to say that 10% were unlucky and the other 90% came out as expected.