Principle vs. Reality for Ted Thompson

[SMACKTALKIE]

From ESPN.com's Kevin Seifert

They tricked us. Or, at least, they fooled me.

When Green Bay acknowledged this winter it was shifting to a 3-4 defense, my thoughts moved immediately to free agency. Finally! Packers general manager Ted Thompson would be forced to dabble in a market he has historically disdained. After all, the Packers were built as a 4-3 team and it's unreasonable to expect every player can make the transition. You figured the Packers would need at least one or two new veteran starters to smooth out the makeover.


http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcnorth/0-9-149/Principle-vs--reality-for-Ted-Thompson.html

[mission]

Decent article, but :

The Bears went 9-7 and lost three games after leading late in the fourth quarter. The Packers, on the other hand, dropped seven of their final nine games and produced the ninth-worst record in the NFL. To stand pat after a 6-10 season is to stake your career on the idea that it was an aberration rather than a sign of long-term trouble.

How do modify a 9-7 record by talking about how they lost three games after leading in the fourth quarter without even a mention of our (what was it?) seven losses by 4 points? I don't know if those (my) numbers are right but it seems like a pretty important exclusion in this case.

[Lurker64]

At the same time though, it is important to note that our base defensive formation this year is the same as our base defensive formation last year when three guys take a step and Kampman puts his hand on the ground. It's not a ridiculous transition.

I would be willing to bet that more than anybody, it's Capers who's comfortable with the defensive talent after a few draft picks. The man does know quite a bit about defense, after all.

[sharpe1027]

Thompson being exposed to high accountability has nothing to do with how many FAs he signs and everything to do with how well the Packers do. If he signed a bunch of FAs, does he get a magical pass this year? The writer seems to try to make some sort of profound statement, but fails miserably.

[CaptainKickass]

I find myself wondering just how long ago did TT/MM decide they wanted to transition to the 3-4 defense.

Is it ridiculous to speculate that they may have been drafting for this very transition since before last years draft?

I'm also curious to know what some other 3-4 coaches or scouts would think of the current talent on the Packer D with regards to using a 3-4 Defense.

[retailguy]

http://k43.pbase.com/o6/61/708661/1/74111592.Fxl8Ffim.s20070208_SeeingRed.jpg

[Merlin]

Thompson got himself a 2-3 year pass with the switch to the 3-4. Now he has an excuse for the next two seasons if things don't go well. If we bomb in 2009 it's because of the "new" defense and it "takes time", like the ZBS we still haven't mastered in 3 seasons. There is always an excuse for Thompson to keep his job and I am sure if we aren't successful in 2009 there will be another one that extends his tenure another 2-3 years. 4 years under Thompson and still his loyal followers see things like he does "I like who we have here" and "I hope we are successful". Coming off of a bad season and the only move we make is to fire the DC? Sound familiar?

[sharpe1027]

Thompson got himself a 2-3 year pass with the switch to the 3-4. Now he has an excuse for the next two seasons if things don't go well. If we bomb in 2009 it's because of the "new" defense and it "takes time", like the ZBS we still haven't mastered in 3 seasons. There is always an excuse for Thompson to keep his job and I am sure if we aren't successful in 2009 there will be another one that extends his tenure another 2-3 years. 4 years under Thompson and still his loyal followers see things like he does "I like who we have here" and "I hope we are successful". Coming off of a bad season and the only move we make is to fire the DC? Sound familiar?

Honestly, what will you say if they were to win the Division this year? I want to hold you to it, so think long and hard before you answer.

I will tell you right now that if they don't make the playoffs, I will be all for a new staff.

I guess if I am going to be accused of having "rose colored" glasses for wanting to giving our GM and head coach another year, then maybe you are using "piss colored" glasses for not recognizing a team that is only one year removed from playing the NFC championship game to a near tie?

[Waldo]

Decent article, but :

The Bears went 9-7 and lost three games after leading late in the fourth quarter. The Packers, on the other hand, dropped seven of their final nine games and produced the ninth-worst record in the NFL. To stand pat after a 6-10 season is to stake your career on the idea that it was an aberration rather than a sign of long-term trouble.

How do modify a 9-7 record by talking about how they lost three games after leading in the fourth quarter without even a mention of our (what was it?) seven losses by 4 points? I don't know if those (my) numbers are right but it seems like a pretty important exclusion in this case.

The Packers were losing in 3 games in 2008 with 5:00 to play in the 4th. Winning or tied in all 13 others.

[Packnut]

This is just Teddy being Teddy. After the Giants ran at will against us in the Championship game, Teddy decided it was nothing but an aberration. Then the 2008 season came and proved Teddy was WRONG once again as everyone ripped our run D apart.

Thompson has severely over-rated the talent he has put together on the defensive side of the ball. I chuckle everytime someone here mentions Hunter or Bishop (am I the only one who remembers the RB blowing by him on his way to a long TD reception?) or some of the other back-ups we have as starting material. They sucked in the 4-3 and they will suck in the 3-4.

I also first thought this move was made to give Teddy more time, but I now believe the natives are very restless and his time is limited if he is wrong again.

[Bossman641]

Thompson got himself a 2-3 year pass with the switch to the 3-4. Now he has an excuse for the next two seasons if things don't go well. If we bomb in 2009 it's because of the "new" defense and it "takes time", like the ZBS we still haven't mastered in 3 seasons. There is always an excuse for Thompson to keep his job and I am sure if we aren't successful in 2009 there will be another one that extends his tenure another 2-3 years. 4 years under Thompson and still his loyal followers see things like he does "I like who we have here" and "I hope we are successful". Coming off of a bad season and the only move we make is to fire the DC? Sound familiar?

Honestly, what will you say if they were to win the Division this year? I want to hold you to it, so think long and hard before you answer.

I will tell you right now that if they don't make the playoffs, I will be all for a new staff.

I guess if I am going to be accused of having "rose colored" glasses for wanting to giving our GM and head coach another year, then maybe you are using "piss colored" glasses for not recognizing a team that is only one year removed from playing the NFC championship game to a near tie?

He'll do the same thing he did when they went to the NFC Championship Game: he won't show up around here again until they start to struggle again. Then he will pretend the success never happened. We've seen it before.

[Dylan McKay]

The way I look at it, is that Thompson would be under even more pressure if he would have signed 85% of the free agents out there because I don't think this team would be all that much better with overpaying the minimum amount of talent that hits the free agent market each year. The Packers now are comfortable salary cap wise when it comes to signing all of their own talent.

I guess with the switch to the 3-4 I expected to see a couple of more free agents on the defensive side of the ball, but that is not how Thompson works as a GM, he is going to put a majority of his eggs in his ability to scout college talent and build the Packers through his drafting ability.

That is reality.

[RashanGary]

I think the reality is that it seems like a good idea to pay whatever the price is to get top tier FA's, it's not nearly as good in practice.

Teams that win championships in todays football do not use FA very often. Ted wants to win a championship. I'm all for shooting for a championship too.

[Bretsky]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdUr5hF0yGc


I picture TTT putting in the word free agency instead of playoffs for a realistic video bit for Packer fans

[HarveyWallbangers]

It isn't too hard to see that, like it or not, Thompson is saving up the cap space to resign the players that that he wants that will be FAs soon.

[bobblehead]

Thompson got himself a 2-3 year pass with the switch to the 3-4. Now he has an excuse for the next two seasons if things don't go well. If we bomb in 2009 it's because of the "new" defense and it "takes time", like the ZBS we still haven't mastered in 3 seasons. There is always an excuse for Thompson to keep his job and I am sure if we aren't successful in 2009 there will be another one that extends his tenure another 2-3 years. 4 years under Thompson and still his loyal followers see things like he does "I like who we have here" and "I hope we are successful". Coming off of a bad season and the only move we make is to fire the DC? Sound familiar?

I couldn't disagree more. I think TT has a one year pass. If we don't produce this year, next year will be make or break. My prediction (and I'm a huge TT supporter) is that if we don't have an 11 win season either this year or next, TT and MM join the many americans looking for work.

[bobblehead]

This is just Teddy being Teddy. After the Giants ran at will against us in the Championship game, Teddy decided it was nothing but an aberration. Then the 2008 season came and proved Teddy was WRONG once again as everyone ripped our run D apart.

Thompson has severely over-rated the talent he has put together on the defensive side of the ball. I chuckle everytime someone here mentions Hunter or Bishop (am I the only one who remembers the RB blowing by him on his way to a long TD reception?) or some of the other back-ups we have as starting material. They sucked in the 4-3 and they will suck in the 3-4.

I also first thought this move was made to give Teddy more time, but I now believe the natives are very restless and his time is limited if he is wrong again.

If you were female I would insist you need to get laid...since you are a guy, I think you need to have a few beers and relax. I think you may be overstating things a bit.

[MJZiggy]

No, he still needs to get laid (don't look at me).

[cpk1994]

It isn't too hard to see that, like it or not, Thompson is saving up the cap space to resign the players that that he wants that will be FAs soon.YOu know, I wonder what the people who say "spend, spend spend" would say if the team spent money on FA and then Jennigs can't be resigned? They would be bitching that TT let Jennigs walk away. Thats why I'm glad TT doesn't listen to those idiots and does things the way HE thinks is best. A GM that listens to the fans ends up becoming one himself.

[Rastak]

It isn't too hard to see that, like it or not, Thompson is saving up the cap space to resign the players that that he wants that will be FAs soon.YOu know, I wonder what the people who say "spend, spend spend" would say if the team spent money on FA and then Jennigs can't be resigned? They would be bitching that TT let Jennigs walk away. Thats why I'm glad TT doesn't listen to those idiots and does things the way HE thinks is best. A GM that listens to the fans ends up becoming one himself.

Just for laughs, lay out that scenario. I can't imagine one where there was no way to sign Jennings. The packers cap situation is extremely healthy short and long term from what I've read. If the next CBA greatly diminished the CAP everybody would be in the same boat.

[Fritz]

Thompson got himself a 2-3 year pass with the switch to the 3-4. Now he has an excuse for the next two seasons if things don't go well. If we bomb in 2009 it's because of the "new" defense and it "takes time", like the ZBS we still haven't mastered in 3 seasons. There is always an excuse for Thompson to keep his job and I am sure if we aren't successful in 2009 there will be another one that extends his tenure another 2-3 years. 4 years under Thompson and still his loyal followers see things like he does "I like who we have here" and "I hope we are successful". Coming off of a bad season and the only move we make is to fire the DC? Sound familiar?

Honestly, what will you say if they were to win the Division this year? I want to hold you to it, so think long and hard before you answer.

I will tell you right now that if they don't make the playoffs, I will be all for a new staff.

I guess if I am going to be accused of having "rose colored" glasses for wanting to giving our GM and head coach another year, then maybe you are using "piss colored" glasses for not recognizing a team that is only one year removed from playing the NFC championship game to a near tie?

The boldfaced line above not only cracked me up, Sharpie, it rings true as well. Many of what I think of as the more "bitter" posters on this board appear to nearly revel in their bitterness. When the Pack did well, oh-so-long-ago - that is to say, two seasons now - there was an eerie silence from the naysayers. Piss-colored glasses. Yes, exactly.

Though it's hypothetical admittedly, I must agree with the assessment of a few others on this board that IF TT went out and signed some semi-big free agent like Olshovsky or Canty or whomever, then proceeded to lose, say, Jennings or Kampman or someone of that ilk, there would be a righteous rage on this board. Yet if TT manages to sign the bulk of the important guys, and he'd better, there will be little credit given him. It's not as sexy to keep your own.
\
Not to say all posters who may not be TT fans are bad people. Not at all. Some I enjoy greatly, and I respect them. But the ones who seem to wallow in their hated - the nattering nabobs of negativity, as it were - are sometimes hard to understand. Do they want the Packers to win or would they prefer them to lose this year so they can indignantly insist on TT's resignation?

[sharpe1027]

Just for laughs, lay out that scenario. I can't imagine one where there was no way to sign Jennings. The packers cap situation is extremely healthy short and long term from what I've read. If the next CBA greatly diminished the CAP everybody would be in the same boat.


36M is 9M over the actual cap. That is a one year block of cash, not permanent cap space. If the cap is reinstated in '10 and the same amount as '09, spending that 9M makes you 9M over the cap in '10 if you pay as you go.

We don't have 36M in cap space any more.

Bigby = 1.5M
Hunter = 1M
Martin = 1M
Kuhn = 1M
Bush = 1M

They displace 5x300K

We currently have 32M in cap space.

9M is the carry forward I doubt TT spends using pay-as-you-go rules. That is money for frontloading (which has the effect of converting carry forward into long term cap space), and the yearly injury contingency (team has to carry at least 2-3M in cap space in case guys get hurt, guys on IR count towards the cap, as do the replacements brought in).

23M is the usable cap space.

Jennings is looking at Berrian money. Roughly 8M. He makes 800K. 7.2M net effect to the cap.

15.8M remaining

Colledge is looking at Scott money. His time at T is concerning, he could push for more. Roughly 5M. He makes 800K. 4.2M net effect to the cap.

11.6M remaining

Collins just went to the pro bowl, and was an all-pro. None of the S's on the market are his caliber, but they set the market. His agent should push for 6M/yr, but TT will try to keep it to 5M/yr. Lets say they split at 5.5M/yr. He makes 900K. 4.6M net effect to the cap.

7M remaining.

The rookies drafted this year will cost about 4M, and will probably displace about 2M worth of players, for a net effect of 2M to the cap.

5M remaining.

Leftovers looking at new deals in the near future (within a year) are Kampman, Pickett, Spitz, Blackmon, Driver, Clifton, Jolly, Chillar, Williams (he's an ERFA so forced to play at 400K if he signs the tender, but I can see a Grant situation where the ERFA tender is far less than he is worth). Of those Spitz, Blackmon, Jolly, and Williams will be high net players (the rest already make a lot of money, a new contract doesn't have a huge effect on the cap). If we stay put at #9, our first round pick is going to cost 5M to the cap next year (because of the rookie salary cap, first round rookies don't count much toward the cap until their second year).

Our cap space isn't nearly as good as it looks.

[packrat]

Shame on Waldo for dousing the critics with reality. What's next--revealing that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny aren't for real?

[HarveyWallbangers]

Shame on Waldo for dousing the critics with reality. What's next--revealing that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny aren't for real?

The Vikings are actually taking the same approach as the Packers. They have a number of players coming due soon. They have cap space, but they know they need that cap space to resign some of their own key players--Peterson, Greenway, Winfield, etc. They already signed Cedric Griffin to an extension.

[HarveyWallbangers]

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/42267287.html

Bedard's blog does point out that the Packers have 17 players (9 starters + Will Blackmon) that will be free agents after this season. That includes Jennings, Kampman, Collins, Colledge, Spitz, Pickett and Clifton.

[Merlin]

Thompson got himself a 2-3 year pass with the switch to the 3-4. Now he has an excuse for the next two seasons if things don't go well. If we bomb in 2009 it's because of the "new" defense and it "takes time", like the ZBS we still haven't mastered in 3 seasons. There is always an excuse for Thompson to keep his job and I am sure if we aren't successful in 2009 there will be another one that extends his tenure another 2-3 years. 4 years under Thompson and still his loyal followers see things like he does "I like who we have here" and "I hope we are successful". Coming off of a bad season and the only move we make is to fire the DC? Sound familiar?

Honestly, what will you say if they were to win the Division this year? I want to hold you to it, so think long and hard before you answer.

I will tell you right now that if they don't make the playoffs, I will be all for a new staff.

I guess if I am going to be accused of having "rose colored" glasses for wanting to giving our GM and head coach another year, then maybe you are using "piss colored" glasses for not recognizing a team that is only one year removed from playing the NFC championship game to a near tie?

I want the Packers to be successful. I also think Thompson has proven he is unsuccessful and only gets one more season. I am all for the 3-4, that way we only need 3 healthy DT's instead of 4, the LB position we have very small LB's for the 3-4. But they are tough and should rebound fine. Just remember, while other teams address their issues, Thompson isn't addressing ours in any way but through the draft and a coaching change. Hopefully Capers changes the mindset like Bates did, that is the only way we are successful in 2009. Offensively we are fine, accept we can't run the ball and the merry-go-round at guard is nauseating. Tauscher looks to be done at this point as a Packer but who knows what he will do.

[sharpe1027]

I want the Packers to be successful. I also think Thompson has proven he is unsuccessful and only gets one more season. I am all for the 3-4, that way we only need 3 healthy DT's instead of 4, the LB position we have very small LB's for the 3-4. But they are tough and should rebound fine. Just remember, while other teams address their issues, Thompson isn't addressing ours in any way but through the draft and a coaching change. Hopefully Capers changes the mindset like Bates did, that is the only way we are successful in 2009. Offensively we are fine, accept we can't run the ball and the merry-go-round at guard is nauseating. Tauscher looks to be done at this point as a Packer but who knows what he will do.

ILB: Height: 6-2 Weight: 236
ILB: Height: 6-2 Weight: 243
ILB: Height: 6-1 Weight: 239
ILB: Height: 6-1 Weight: 248

Which of those are too small and which of those are from the very successful Pittsburgh Steelers?

OLB: Height: 6-2 Weight: 265
OLB: Height: 6-4 Weight: 265
OLB: Height: 6-3 Weight: 247
OLB: Height: 6-0 Weight: 242

Same question...

[texaspackerbacker]

A page and a half of posts, and not one word about the GLARINGLY OBVIOUS reason for badness last season: INJURIES.

Thompson clearly has not broken the bank on free agents because he doesn't see the need to replace what we have--like a lot of media morons and forum fools do. The let's-hang-on-to-what-we've-got angle also enters into it.

[rbaloha1]

TT needs to get us back into the playoffs this upcoming season -- not 2-3 years.

Obviously TT is comfortable with the defensive transition, current roster and the upcoming draft filled with 3-4 types.

However if the Packers fail to make the playoffs again TT could be removed.

[PlantPage55]

Which of those are too small and which of those are from the very successful Pittsburgh Steelers?


Oo! Oo! I have the answer!

He made it up, using cliches and rhetoric, without researching the fact that they do not apply to our team!

[sharpe1027]

Just remember, while other teams address their issues, Thompson isn't addressing ours in any way but through the draft and a coaching change.

Just remember, every time that you see a team sign a FA or make a trade there are 30 or 31 other teams that did nothing. I honestly think that some people have the mindset that all non-packer signings are made by the same successful team.

When one of the top 3-4 FAs do not get signed by the Packers that means 27+ other teams also did nothing. Yet somehow people still complain when it doesn't happen each and every year.

[Bretsky]

All hail TTT

[SnakeLH2006]

Thompson got himself a 2-3 year pass with the switch to the 3-4. Now he has an excuse for the next two seasons if things don't go well. If we bomb in 2009 it's because of the "new" defense and it "takes time", like the ZBS we still haven't mastered in 3 seasons. There is always an excuse for Thompson to keep his job and I am sure if we aren't successful in 2009 there will be another one that extends his tenure another 2-3 years. 4 years under Thompson and still his loyal followers see things like he does "I like who we have here" and "I hope we are successful". Coming off of a bad season and the only move we make is to fire the DC? Sound familiar?

Brilliant!