Blind Faith: Is this TT's last year at GM?

[SnakeLH2006]

So, Snake has been reading up plenty on the draft and many Rats on here have varied opinions on what GB needs to do at the top of draft....

Snake has been a pro-TT supporter for a long time, yet his BPA philosophy has netted us one big-time player in the first round, Arod.

Jennings is a beast, yet he was a 2nd round guy.

The point is this, what if the BPA available is a moot point considering we seem to be spinning in circles lately under TT's guidance?...Holes to fill EVERY year, yet we seem to be weak EVERY year at both lines. Why not pay for a guy (overpay in TT terms it seems) or at least put top creedance into getting a top guy in the first?

Are you happy this year in 2009, if we go BPA, then pick a WR ala Crabtree or a RB ala Beanie?

Snake's not....and really feel if Ted aschews FA so much, that his philosophy, and possibly ego transcend the franchise, he may be on his way out.

Results, aka wins, determine a GM's lifeline in the NFL. I won't argue Ted knows talent, but it seems absurd if we go BPA and get Wells or Crabtree (as great as they may be) when we can't fill our holes on OT or across the board on the DL.

Snake is really feeling uneasy this year as many "good" prospects may be available at postitions we are strong at, yet if he can't fill them in FA or with his past draft picks, WTF is point of having so many good RB's or WR's when it's SO OBVIOUS we need some major upgrades at both line positions?

This is make or break for TT...He's had some solid picks in later rounds, but his 1st rounder without names rhyming with Baron or Codgers reek of mediocrity or failure.

If he doesn't get us a stud at the #1, this may be another long year (aka a guy who is a stud right away as a starter to plug a hole) and may be his last year at the GM helm.

Thoughts? I like Ted as a GM, but we better go get us some quality rook starters this year, as I hate to think my boisterous Bear buddies will be laughing their way to to the playoffs with Cutler (hate that punk ass QB) while we sit at home looking at 2010 as our year. C'mon. :roll:

[Waldo]

I'd love it if we took Beanie.

Aaron with 8 in the box and Greg and Jordy to throw to outside. :shock:

I like Jackson a great deal, and am lukewarm on Grant. Nobody is scared of them. They rarely see 8 in the box unless formation calls for it.

Beanie was OK this year, playing hurt most of the year. His 2007 tape when fully healthy is top 5 back material.

His style, size, and physical talent are such that many people have said that he's the closest thing to Jim Brown since Jim Brown. Whether he has a career like Jim Brown remains to be seen.

[The Shadow]

So, Snake has been reading up plenty on the draft and many Rats on here have varied opinions on what GB needs to do at the top of draft....

Snake has been a pro-TT supporter for a long time, yet his BPA philosophy has netted us one big-time player in the first round, Arod.

Jennings is a beast, yet he was a 2nd round guy.

The point is this, what if the BPA available is a moot point considering we seem to be spinning in circles lately under TT's guidance?

Are you happy this year in 2009, if we go BPA, then pick a WR ala Crabtree or a RB ala Beanie?

Snake's not....and really feel if Ted aschews FA so much, that his philosophy, and possibly ego transcend the franchise, he may be on his way out.

Results, aka wins, determine a GM's lifeline in the NFL. I won't argue Ted knows talent, but it seems absurd if we go BPA and get Wells or Crabtree (as great as they may be) when we can't fill our holes on OT or across the board on the DL.

Snake is really feeling uneasy this year as many "good" prospects may be available at postitions we are strong at, yet if he can't fill them in FA or with his past draft picks, WTF is point of having so many good RB's or WR's when it's SO OBVIOUS we need some major upgrades at both line positions?

This is make or break for TT...He's had some solid picks in later rounds, but his 1st rounder without names rhyming with Baron or Codgers reek of mediocrity or failure.

If he doesn't get us a stud at the #1, this may be another long year (aka a guy who is a stud right away as a starter to plug a hole) and may be his last year at the GM helm.

Thoughts? I like Ted as a GM, but we better go get us some quality rook starters this year, as I hate to think my boisterous Bear buddies will be laughing their way to to the playoffs with Cutler (hate that punk ass QB) while we sit at home looking at 2010 as our year. C'mon. :roll:

I would advise Snake to not worry about that.

[Lurker64]

Thompson has at least one more year (more like two) before he's even on the hot seat. He's disliked by a lot of fans, but that's an honor shared by most GMs in the league. Hell, Carl Peterson in Kansas City lasted a couple of decades while being widely despised by Chiefs fans. The people who are Thompson's boss like the man a lot more than the average fan does, and they're the people who get to make decisions. The NFC championship and executive of the year title got him a lot of capital, and one bad year (for which legitimate excuses can be made) doesn't cancel that out.

It's a truth of the NFL draft that you can't really judge a draft until three seasons later. So it's really ridiculous to look to escort Thompson out on the backs of the 08 and 07 draft (I think we can agree that 05 and 06 were pretty good). I mean, what if Harrell plays 16 games this season and leads the DL to be a force this year? It's certainly not entirely improbable.

You know that Thompson is on his way out when he fires McCarthy, but until then he's pretty much untouchable.

[pbmax]

I think Thompson has more time than the coach, and I think M3 has two years minimum to turn around the team with his new defense. Thompson gets one more coach should he have to dump McCarthy early. He was asked to work with Sherman.

Buckle up detractors, its three more years of T2 at least. Wild card is that neither guy was hired by Murphy, but outside of Favre, he has been busy catching up on the business side and the CBA. Still, he obviously doesn't feel as tied to the dynamic duo as Harlan would have.

[SnakeLH2006]

Thompson has at least one more year (more like two) before he's even on the hot seat. He's disliked by a lot of fans, but that's an honor shared by most GMs in the league. Hell, Carl Peterson in Kansas City lasted a couple of decades while being widely despised by Chiefs fans. The people who are Thompson's boss like the man a lot more than the average fan does, and they're the people who get to make decisions. The NFC championship and executive of the year title got him a lot of capital, and one bad year (for which legitimate excuses can be made) doesn't cancel that out.

It's a truth of the NFL draft that you can't really judge a draft until three seasons later. So it's really ridiculous to look to escort Thompson ought on the backs of the 08 and 07 draft (I think we can agree that 05 and 06 were pretty good). I mean, what if Harrell plays 16 games this season and leads the DL to be a force this year? It's certainly not entirely improbable.

You know that Thompson is on his way out when he fires McCarthy, but until then he's pretty much untouchable.

Agreed....There's plenty on here ready to/have been ready to lynch TT, but for once I'd like him to look at needs. It sucks it comes down to the draft to do it, but TT put this on himself. I understand/like the philosophy of "not overpaying" as that keeps your cap in check. We do well in that, what I'm saying is TT NEEDS to get a stud in the draft. I know it's a crapshoot, but he puts himself in that position but not going after and overpaying FA'S. Not a prob. again, but he's here now, and that is his MO....So now he MUST hit on one of these top picks. If not, we are a joke.

Snake is VERY optimistic and we may be 10-6 this year in a weak NFC North, but as much as I don't like Cutler, I had many Bear buddies tell me this, "We haven't had a top notch QB in 20 years, sobeit if it was for a bunch of picks....We made the deal. We got a prob. top 10 QB, and now have a chance with our sick D." That's very much paraphrased, yet I do agree. TT is not taking chances, although he is, by not making trades, singing FA's to big contracts, we now have lots of cap space, but little credible additions to make us better. Hope for injuries to subside, young guys to get better?...Sounds alot like the Brewers.

Snake likes TT, but the point is he must eschew his hard-on for the BPA, and concentrate on the best player for the positions he needs in the draft when he says fuck FA, and hasn't demonstrated a knack for making trades we need. Does anyone disagree with that? And if we get the BPA, albeit a position of obvious strength and disregard our old ass OT's and pathetic DL players, then what? He's done, as this will repeat 2008.

I want Ted to succeed, but he really needs to step up is all Snake is saying. If all you do is rely on the draft, and you go BPA ALL THE TIME, they might not pan out either (thus Harrell thus far) but damn if he doesn't do something in 2009's draft...that's his ONLY trump card....and Snake would OWN him at Sheepshead.

[Bretsky]

Next year is a key year for TTT after hibernating through free agency yet again.....but I still see him being here at minimum for two more years

IF Crabby or Wells is a star, we should have absolutely no hesitation grabbing either one

If the Crab turns in multiple pro bowl years, none of us woud complain if they took him over the #4 OT.

Ditto for the top RB in the draft.

Swing for a star TTT

[Lurker64]

I'm not sure if Thompson's reputation as an "always take the BPA, no matter what" guy is really terribly deserved. Certainly, he doesn't always take players at the positions that the average fan thinks are needs, but oftentimes Thompson doesn't devote a ton of resources to those positions *and* they work out all right somehow.

I mean, in 2007 going into the draft according to fans we needed a weapon for Favre (probably a WR, but a good receiving TE would be nice), an RB to replace Green, and a FB to replace William Henderson. Now the passing offense did just fine in 2007 despite not taking a WR until the 3rd round and not taking a TE that made the roster, and the RB and FB situations worked out just fine in the end, even though Jackson (who was likely a "need" pick) was somewhat underwhelming.

Going into 2008, we didn't think we had much in the way of needs, although a backup QB and a corner to groom to replace Al or Chuck would be nice to have, but we addressed both of those positions in the second round. I mean, the thing that ultimately hurt the team the most last year was the lack of pressure from the defensive line, and at draft time in 2008 Harrell hadn't even suffered his back inury yet, and we weren't really in position to pick up much of immediately impactful great pass rushers.

So does Ted really *always* take the BPA, or is it possible that just "his estimation of the team's needs, based on careful analysis of the roster and talking to coaches" may be different than our estimation of the team's needs?

If there's one criticism you can make about Thompson is that historically he tends to make very safe picks early on. I mean, Aaron Rodgers may well have been the steal of the draft, he had fallen so far and he fit a need. A.J. Hawk was kind of a no-brainer (and was widely considered to be the safest pick in the draft), and throughout his drafts Thompson always seems to favor high character, high production, football guys with leadership skills over guys who have a shot at being a superstar. Is that really "BPA" behavior, or is that just a reasonable degree of risk aversion?

[SnakeLH2006]

Next year is a key year for TTT after hibernating through free agency yet again.....but I still see him being here at minimum for two more years

IF Crabby or Wells is a star, we should have absolutely no hesitation grabbing either one

If the Crab turns in multiple pro bowl years, none of us woud complain if they took him over the #4 OT.

Ditto for the top RB in the draft.

Swing for a star TTT

Man, Bret, I love ya on here for being a voice of reason......yet are you really willing to sit through Beanie gettin 450 yards or Crabbie going for 38 catches, 550 yards, 1 TD as a rook? C'mon man, I know you are all about that Beanie from Fox Sports (they all screwed us man, lol) but those guys MAY be stars, but no one really knows....get us a lockdown DT,DE,OT....else it ain't gonna matter as it's another Jordy year again, dude.

Those guys at RB or WR won't win us shit this year in 2009 or prob. 2010...and if they are LTom's or Randy Mosses' eventually sobeit..it ain't gonna matter cuz without significant FA or other advances on our roster we'll be 6-10 again or maybe 8-8....some rooks make a difference...have a hard time seeing Wells being our starter (Patler would argue that Grant is good <prob. 95% of Rats disagree with that and Waldo would shove Wells down his throat, but it's moot...who cares? We are OK at RB> but even if Wells went for 1100 yards yet Snake don't see it ((I still see Driver being at least as good in 2009 and Jennings going NUTS, so Crabs having more than 40 catches))..what's the fucking point? We are tight at RB and WR. Those positions whether it be for guys who are eventual upgrades are so moot in 2009....Maybe 2010 and beyond, but TT really needs to fix our lines for sure.

Fix our OT or DL issues first. This ain't like the Favre era where we expected/knew we'd get 10 wins and contend EVERY year. Fuck that. We need a Line infusion bigtime..Those are guys we can get anyday at WR or RB.....maybe great, but not gonna do shit for years.

That's the whole point of this thread....Why go BPA, when we'll wait for ANOTHER year if they even pan out? Go for a stud at need...OT or DT or even DL. It's so easy even a Partial could see it. :shock:

[Jimx29]

it seems like deja vu all over again.....


we've missed the playoffs 3 of the 4 years tt has been here after making it 10 of the 12 previous years.

[Partial]

Next year is a key year for TTT after hibernating through free agency yet again.....but I still see him being here at minimum for two more years

IF Crabby or Wells is a star, we should have absolutely no hesitation grabbing either one

If the Crab turns in multiple pro bowl years, none of us woud complain if they took him over the #4 OT.

Ditto for the top RB in the draft.

Swing for a star TTT

Definitely

[Lurker64]

we've missed the playoffs 3 of the 4 years tt has been here after making it 10 of the 12 previous years.

Yet we made it deeper into the playoffs in TT's one playoff year than we did in all but 2 of those 10 playoff visits.

I don't know about you, but I would prefer a shot at the superbowl every four years than 5 wildcard weekend losses in six years. Championships are special, and any team that gets close to one can win one. But winning your division or getting to the playoffs aren't particularly special feats.

[CaliforniaCheez]

Some of you are way too harsh on Ted.

What free agents are out there that you wanted?

Ted is doing well in a tough job. There is much that is outside his control.

He keeps cap room for flexibility so he can act when others can't.

Compared to many of his predecessors, he has done very well.

[SnakeLH2006]

Some of you are way too harsh on Ted.

What free agents are out there that you wanted?

Ted is doing well in a tough job. There is much that is outside his control.

He keeps cap room for flexibility so he can act when others can't.

Compared to many of his predecessors, he has done very well.

I hope you aren't talking Snake? I like TT, just saying he really needs to do something soon as his anti-FA shit for so many years is so fucking tiresome lately, and can't defend it anymore.

I only advocate him to draft for need as his misses on BPA at the top picks are gonna be his downfall.

[RashanGary]

Next year is a key year for TTT after hibernating through free agency yet again.....but I still see him being here at minimum for two more years

IF Crabby or Wells is a star, we should have absolutely no hesitation grabbing either one

If the Crab turns in multiple pro bowl years, none of us woud complain if they took him over the #4 OT.

Ditto for the top RB in the draft.

Swing for a star TTT

You know, I'm sitting here hoping on hope that it's a big guy on one of the lines (preferably NT or OT) but you're right here. Draft picks our a teams best chance at a great player. High draft picks are the best chance yet. No matter what position (QB aside), getting a star with this pick will be the right move, even if it's a RB or a WR. This team needs stars to take that next leap so BPA has to the approach. It's hard to do, but it's the right thing to do.

[sheepshead]

McCarthy would go first IMO. If we go 8-8 or some such thing Mike takes the fall. The Gruden, Cowher, Shanahan rumors will start in November. General Managers dont loose 5 games by 4 points. Remember that.

[rbaloha1]

Check out Sporting News drat grade minus Sherman's 2004 draft.

Solid roster. Still unsure of the future given the transition to the 3-4 which was TT's decision.

[pbmax]

IF Crabby or Wells is a star, we should have absolutely no hesitation grabbing either one.
So Bretsky, you have no objection to success? That's a bold stand you are taking there. :lol:

But what are you and Partial predicting? One year "key" or two "probably here"?

[pbmax]

I'd like him to look at needs...
...TT NEEDS to get a stud in the draft. I know it's a crapshoot...
These are simply aphorisms. And they contradict each other. The draft is about probabilities and the odds are less that 50% that first round picks pan out to multi-year starters. If you concentrate only on positions of need, you are guaranteed to lower your chance of success. If you want a stud in a certain spot, then BPA is the way to go.

So now he MUST hit on one of these top picks.
This is a bad bet. And its why more picks are better than fewer.

... he must eschew his hard-on for the BPA, and concentrate on the best player for the positions he needs in the draft...
Every team does this and wants this to happen. It doesn't work out as often as it does. You can see it working out when a team trades down, other times you are at the mercy of the teams picking ahead of you. Even with trades, not always in your control.

And if we get the BPA, albeit a position of obvious strength and disregard our old ass OT's and pathetic DL players, then what?
Why do we think THIS year's draft class will develop faster than last years, when Giacomini was not ready to go. Tauscher is the rare later round pick who was ready to go at Tackle. If you target a tackle in the first round, then the chances of getting a stud diminish.

I want Ted to succeed, but he really needs to step up is all Snake is saying...
Then he should play the odds, otherwise you are advocating more risk.

If all you do is rely on the draft, and you go BPA ALL THE TIME, they might not pan out either (thus Harrell thus far)
Considering the price that Corey Williams and Colin Cole demanded on the market, the Harrell pick does not look so much like BPA as a pick where you knew you would need a player. Neither of the two DTs who left are world beaters, but both commanded princely sums. Williams might pan out at 3-4 end, but his contract figure makes even less sense there and in 2008 we didn't know Capers would be here.

[Partial]

I really don't think he drafts BPA. Their is an obvious rating system where need is clearly factored in, but I'm sure some GMs put a higher value on need than others.

With that said, I would bet my bottom dollar TT has at least this year and next. The switch of DC to a highly credible name and with MMs offensive prowess bought TT and co at least another year.

TT is a pretty good GM imo, but he really needs to hit on a star this year. If this pick turns into another Harrell, that won't bode well for our team. If this guy is a star, I think we'll be playoff bound for a long time.

[wist43]

Don't see TT as being on the hot seat at all...

He'll keep plodding along with his BPA approach, regardless of position, and the team will continue to try to fill "needs" by developing from within.

And that approach is all well and good, if you're hitting on all your high draft choices, and some of your 6th rounders prove to be competent staters, with the occassional surprise stud in there.

Of course that hasn't been the case though... as TT has too many high picks that are either pedestrian, Hawk; or a bust, Harrell; or wasted, Murphy; or redundant, Jones and Nelson, etc...

Don't see how that ever lands us in a SB...

That said, TT has had enough decent picks, and they have done a decent job developing some guys to the point where GB is at least as good as anyone else in the division, so I don't see that TT will be going anywhere for a while.

[rbaloha1]

Don't see TT as being on the hot seat at all...

He'll keep plodding along with his BPA approach, regardless of position, and the team will continue to try to fill "needs" by developing from within.

And that approach is all well and good, if you're hitting on all your high draft choices, and some of your 6th rounders prove to be competent staters, with the occassional surprise stud in there.

Of course that hasn't been the case though... as TT has too many high picks that are either pedestrian, Hawk; or a bust, Harrell; or wasted, Murphy; or redundant, Jones and Nelson, etc...

Don't see how that ever lands us in a SB...

That said, TT has had enough decent picks, and they have done a decent job developing some guys to the point where GB is at least as good as anyone else in the division, so I don't see that TT will be going anywhere for a while.

TT is a disciple of Ron Wolf. This approach also helped the Seahawks reach the Super Bowl.

[The Shadow]

TT is not on the hot seat. I think most thinking fans seem the wisdom of his steady, build thru the draft approach.

[wist43]

Don't see TT as being on the hot seat at all...

He'll keep plodding along with his BPA approach, regardless of position, and the team will continue to try to fill "needs" by developing from within.

And that approach is all well and good, if you're hitting on all your high draft choices, and some of your 6th rounders prove to be competent staters, with the occassional surprise stud in there.

Of course that hasn't been the case though... as TT has too many high picks that are either pedestrian, Hawk; or a bust, Harrell; or wasted, Murphy; or redundant, Jones and Nelson, etc...

Don't see how that ever lands us in a SB...

That said, TT has had enough decent picks, and they have done a decent job developing some guys to the point where GB is at least as good as anyone else in the division, so I don't see that TT will be going anywhere for a while.

TT is a disciple of Ron Wolf. This approach also helped the Seahawks reach the Super Bowl.

I agree with the approach in general... have to build thru the draft; however, if you're not hitting on enough draft picks, which the Packers aren't; and, you're not augmenting your roster thru other means, i.e. FA and trades, which the Packers aren't; then, no, you'll never get to a SB... unless it's just fluke luck, on a down year for the NFC, ala Chicago a few years ago.

In the end, I don't think TT is any danger... he'll be in GB till he decides to leave.

[SnakeLH2006]

Don't see TT as being on the hot seat at all...

He'll keep plodding along with his BPA approach, regardless of position, and the team will continue to try to fill "needs" by developing from within.

And that approach is all well and good, if you're hitting on all your high draft choices, and some of your 6th rounders prove to be competent staters, with the occassional surprise stud in there.

Of course that hasn't been the case though... as TT has too many high picks that are either pedestrian, Hawk; or a bust, Harrell; or wasted, Murphy; or redundant, Jones and Nelson, etc...

Don't see how that ever lands us in a SB...

That said, TT has had enough decent picks, and they have done a decent job developing some guys to the point where GB is at least as good as anyone else in the division, so I don't see that TT will be going anywhere for a while.

TT is a disciple of Ron Wolf. This approach also helped the Seahawks reach the Super Bowl.

I agree with the approach in general... have to build thru the draft; however, if you're not hitting on enough draft picks, which the Packers aren't; and, you're not augmenting your roster thru other means, i.e. FA and trades, which the Packers aren't; then, no, you'll never get to a SB... unless it's just fluke luck, on a down year for the NFC, ala Chicago a few years ago.

In the end, I don't think TT is any danger... he'll be in GB till he decides to leave.

Perhaps Snake jumped the boat a bit, yet I do believe TT is in danger in the near future IF and a big IF we don't make the playoffs this year. He might buy a year or two, but in that case M3 is gone for sure.

Definitely build through the draft...it's a great approach as far as cap issues and augmenting a solid roster of young guys making minimal salaries so you can pay your stars.

But Wist sees what Snake is saying...if we DON'T bolster the roster/upgrade with FA or trades..it's all a crapshoot in the draft. Now Snake likes the draft 10 fold, yet it seems TT's pattern is going BPA much of the time with safe/character picks...That's fine, but most of his picks aren't making much of difference. Hawk is exhibit A.

I have no prob. with the BPA available, yet what is the difference if it was a need like OT, DT, or DE? Not much. Just cuz that draftee is a need, doesn't mean he's much more likely to bust (just possibly not as good as the BPA). When the BPA busts it's the same...many 1st rounders bust. Yes, it's a crapshoot, but put your bets on a need (when you can't acquire your needs in FA or trades) instead of the BPA, when they both may bust equally. Also, those BPA's WON'T help us win more in 2009 at WR or RB (positions of strength) when we are so dire on both the OL and the DL. That's the point of this topic.

When the GM eschews 2 of the 3 routes (FA and trades) for acquiring "difference makers", then he MUST rely on the draft to get the elite players that make you a SB team. So far, other than Arod and Jennings, he's missed badly for elite players. That's the boat TT is on.

TT might go a decade yet, and I'm fine with that (but that means we are winning), but Snake is convinced that if he goes 6-10 again, he's close to done, as the Packer nation can't/won't stand for mediocrity when the Favre era won most EVERY year (maybe not SB's, but playoffs)...that shit keeps your job at GM. Playoffs...

TT is 1 for 4 so far. I'm not out to lynch him yet, but this is a damn ass critical draft for TT, cuz he makes it that way. TT does this to himself by not acquiring difference makers. As much as Snake hates Cutler, I think that was an awesome addition to a glaring need for their team that will make them a 10 win team for many seasons potentially.

And to finalize this post, TT does do safe picks (that's fine) but when you need an elite player with the first pick (as my take was his 1st rounders have been mostly underwhelming) and he needs to get us a stud immediately to start and help dominate. BPA in this draft will NOT do that this year. Dominant players win championships in the NFL, but we truly need one to fill a hole this year, not to ride the bench for a year or two. That much is so damn true.

[sharpe1027]

Perhaps Snake jumped the boat a bit, yet I do believe TT is in danger in the near future IF and a big IF we don't make the playoffs this year. He might buy a year or two, but in that case M3 is gone for sure.

Definitely build through the draft...it's a great approach as far as cap issues and augmenting a solid roster of young guys making minimal salaries so you can pay your stars.

But Wist sees what Snake is saying...if we DON'T bolster the roster/upgrade with FA or trades..it's all a crapshoot in the draft. Now Snake likes the draft 10 fold, yet it seems TT's pattern is going BPA much of the time with safe/character picks...That's fine, but most of his picks aren't making much of difference. Hawk is exhibit A.

I have no prob. with the BPA available, yet what is the difference if it was a need like OT, DT, or DE? Not much. Just cuz that draftee is a need, doesn't mean he's much more likely to bust (just possibly not as good as the BPA). When the BPA busts it's the same...many 1st rounders bust. Yes, it's a crapshoot, but put your bets on a need (when you can't acquire your needs in FA or trades) instead of the BPA, when they both may bust equally. Also, those BPA's WON'T help us win more in 2009 at WR or RB (positions of strength) when we are so dire on both the OL and the DL. That's the point of this topic.

When the GM eschews 2 of the 3 routes (FA and trades) for acquiring "difference makers", then he MUST rely on the draft to get the elite players that make you a SB team. So far, other than Arod and Jennings, he's missed badly for elite players. That's the boat TT is on.

TT might go a decade yet, and I'm fine with that (but that means we are winning), but Snake is convinced that if he goes 6-10 again, he's close to done, as the Packer nation can't/won't stand for mediocrity when the Favre era won most EVERY year (maybe not SB's, but playoffs)...that shit keeps your job at GM. Playoffs...

TT is 1 for 4 so far. I'm not out to lynch him yet, but this is a damn ass critical draft for TT, cuz he makes it that way. TT does this to himself by not acquiring difference makers. As much as Snake hates Cutler, I think that was an awesome addition to a glaring need for their team that will make them a 10 win team for many seasons potentially.

And to finalize this post, TT does do safe picks (that's fine) but when you need an elite player with the first pick (as my take was his 1st rounders have been mostly underwhelming) and he needs to get us a stud immediately to start and help dominate. BPA in this draft will NOT do that this year. Dominant players win championships in the NFL, but we truly need one to fill a hole this year, not to ride the bench for a year or two. That much is so damn true.

Snake,

Just how good does a player have to be considered an elite player in your mind? Just how many of these elite players exist on other teams? Over what period of time were these elite players acquired? Looking back at past playoff teams, just how many of the guys on the teams were already established elite players?

A few points that I hope jump out at you from thinking about the above series of questions.

1.) If you define elite players as a very high level of play, even the successful teams have very few.

2.) I think you will find that elite players are acquired over a number of years, not all at once.

3.) Many players were not considered "elite" until after the team had success, which brings a classic chicken or the egg scenario.

Your analysis of the Packers falls short because it only considers players from the draft. Contrary to the widely repeated perception, the post-Sherman Packers have dipped into and found success in free agency.

Players on the Packers you failed to consider that some could plausibly hold out as being elite (let's not argue whether they are elite, they are at least good enough to discuss):

Pickett - Free agent.
Woodson - Free agent.
Harris - Resigned.
Kampman - Resigned.
Collins - Draft.
Grant - Trade.
Driver - Resigned.
Barnett - Resigned.

Solid Contributors:

Poppinga - Draft and Resigned.
Bigby - Free agent.
Chillar - Free agent.


Would you prefer that the Packers let their players make it all the way to free agency before they resigned them? If not, then maybe resigning their own should be, for all intents and purposes, considered a free agency signing.

Bottom line, I think the Packers have been more successful in Free Agency than many teams. Are there some teams more active, yes, but there are some that are less active and it should be about the success. I feel that many teams have been less successful in free agency.

I do not think the problems are as simple as "not enough free agents and trades," or "not enough play makers." If it were that simple, then there is no reason that the Packers should have sniffed the playoffs a year ago, yet there they were in the NFC championship game, a few plays from the SB.

While I too tend to get excited about new players, I think that human nature makes us feel that the "grass is greener." Logic seems to suggest otherwise.

[Gunakor]

but most of his picks aren't making much of difference. Hawk is exhibit A.

Let me clear this up. AJ Hawk is a significant upgrade at the position he has played since being drafted. Before Hawk was drafted we had Paris Lenon playing that OLB position. There is absolutely no question that Hawk is a much better LB than Lenon. Hawk has unquestionably made a difference compared to where we were before he was drafted. He just hasn't ascended to the elite All Pro level that many imagined he would in April 2006. He's still better than Lenon was in 2005.

A better exhibit A would be Justin Harrell.

[cheesner]

but most of his picks aren't making much of difference. Hawk is exhibit A.

Let me clear this up. AJ Hawk is a significant upgrade at the position he has played since being drafted. Before Hawk was drafted we had Paris Lenon playing that OLB position. There is absolutely no question that Hawk is a much better LB than Lenon. Hawk has unquestionably made a difference compared to where we were before he was drafted. He just hasn't ascended to the elite All Pro level that many imagined he would in April 2006. He's still better than Lenon was in 2005.

A better exhibit A would be Justin Harrell.

Also, if you look at the draft when Hawk was taken, there are perhaps only 2 players drafted after him that have had bigger impacts for their teams, Ngata and Cutler. To rip on TT for drafting Hawk is silly, there just weren't that many options available.

Harrell is the good counter-argument for saying that TT drafts safe. That was a very risky move that certainly has not paid off (to this point)

[cheesner]

. . .

Don't see how that ever lands us in a SB...


The Packers were a close OT loss away from the SB, just 2 years ago. (my how soon people forget)

TT has hit on more draft picks than SB champs, the Steelers, over the time span that TT has been in charge.

The Steelers use the same approach and have signed just a couple of mid-level FAs.


And for the record, I think that TT is closer to an extension than getting fired. The only way he leaves in the next 3 years is if he wants to go.

[SnakeLH2006]

. . .

Don't see how that ever lands us in a SB...


The Packers were a close OT loss away from the SB, just 2 years ago. (my how soon people forget)

TT has hit on more draft picks than SB champs, the Steelers, over the time span that TT has been in charge.

The Steelers use the same approach and have signed just a couple of mid-level FAs.


And for the record, I think that TT is closer to an extension than getting fired. The only way he leaves in the next 3 years is if he wants to go.

Not so much..Not to base on argument on The Sporting News, but their draft/analysis makes them the "best" print media for NFL draft analysis.

The latest Sporting News did any interesting rating/look at the last 5 drafts for EVERY team (although subjective it did list how someone is an elite player...Pro Bowls or massive stats for their position). The Steelers got a very high drafting grade for the past 5 years with 4 "elite" players...aka studs with far fewer draft picks than TT has had (49). With those 49 (by far the highest in the NFL over the last 5 years), Ted has hit 1 elite player.

This is the whole point. He's laying his eggs in 1 basket. He knows talent, but they gave him a C (and Snake couldn't argue that either...49 picks, 1 elite, and comparing it to other teams, many busted picks, many gone off the roster). So to stay objective, his drafting has been lackluster. Go read it, it's a good read, and Snake isn't here to bust TT's balls, just saying he really needs to get some "difference makers" through the draft, not just average players.

As far as an above post made about FA...yes Woodson is a beast...but all the resignings are OK too, but none of them "made us better"....we "already" had them. Great we locked them up, but so many NFL teams do that nowadays. I hate FA, but most teams lock up the core, WE "under TT" are no different than most all teams. The elite teams draft elite players to continue their playoff excursions...We do not under Ted.

That Sporting News article made several valid, factual posts about drafting in the last 5 years...TT is quite average at best at the draft regardless of his enormous amount of picks. The old adage is "you get what you pay for" and it's pretty true.

To stay on topic....Snake likes TT, but damn if he doesn't need to get a beast to do something for once as a rookie THIS YEAR. Wells, Crabtree...are/will be prob. great, but if he busts with a stud contributor with his lack of FA/trades, then we may go 6-10 again, as our "core" is about what it is...average, and not getting much better. Who then, is our stud (out of nowhere potential Pro-Bowler) from out last couple of years picks? Humor Snake, but the talent is not there..JH might be pretty good, but anyone else? This is the whole point, we need to get a stud-need pick this year, else we may go 1-5 under TT and miss the 2009 playoffs. Great teams draft studs. We don't do that. 8-)

[sharpe1027]

To stay on topic....Snake likes TT, but damn if he doesn't need to get a beast to do something for once as a rookie THIS YEAR. Wells, Crabtree...are/will be prob. great, but if he busts with a stud contributor with his lack of FA/trades, then we may go 6-10 again, as our "core" is about what it is...average, and not getting much better. Who then, is our stud (out of nowhere potential Pro-Bowler) from out last couple of years picks? Humor Snake, but the talent is not there..JH might be pretty good, but anyone else? This is the whole point, we need to get a stud-need pick this year, else we may go 1-5 under TT and miss the 2009 playoffs. Great teams draft studs. We don't do that. 8-)

Snake, I still don't think I understand your logic. I can understand the worry about the end results, but this perception that the Packers don't use free agency has never been explained to me.

To me it seems that the Packers have had some very good successes in Free Agency and have yet to have a big failure that kills their salary cap. They currently have 3-4 starters on the Defensive side of the ball from free agency (Woodson, Pickett, Chillar, Bigby). This is from only the past few years. As far as studs, one of those players was in the running for defensive player of the year. It doesn't get much better than that.

What exactly are your expectations for free agency? A Woodson caliber signing every year? Have you stopped to compare your expectations with what the majority of other teams do in free agency? I swear some people think that every free agent signing that the Packers don't make goes to the same mythical team.

Now that the Packers have made a few free agent signings again this year I have watched the complaints shift to this nebulous "playmaker" or "stud" argument. I don't buy it.

[cheesner]

Not so much..Not to base on argument on The Sporting News, but their draft/analysis makes them the "best" print media for NFL draft analysis.

The latest Sporting News did any interesting rating/look at the last 5 drafts for EVERY team (although subjective it did list how someone is an elite player...Pro Bowls or massive stats for their position). The Steelers got a very high drafting grade for the past 5 years with 4 "elite" players...aka studs with far fewer draft picks than TT has had (49). With those 49 (by far the highest in the NFL over the last 5 years), Ted has hit 1 elite player.

This is the whole point. He's laying his eggs in 1 basket. He knows talent, but they gave him a C (and Snake couldn't argue that either...49 picks, 1 elite, and comparing it to other teams, many busted picks, many gone off the roster). So to stay objective, his drafting has been lackluster. Go read it, it's a good read, and Snake isn't here to bust TT's balls, just saying he really needs to get some "difference makers" through the draft, not just average players.

As far as an above post made about FA...yes Woodson is a beast...but all the resignings are OK too, but none of them "made us better"....we "already" had them. Great we locked them up, but so many NFL teams do that nowadays. I hate FA, but most teams lock up the core, WE "under TT" are no different than most all teams. The elite teams draft elite players to continue their playoff excursions...We do not under Ted.

That Sporting News article made several valid, factual posts about drafting in the last 5 years...TT is quite average at best at the draft regardless of his enormous amount of picks. The old adage is "you get what you pay for" and it's pretty true.

To stay on topic....Snake likes TT, but damn if he doesn't need to get a beast to do something for once as a rookie THIS YEAR. Wells, Crabtree...are/will be prob. great, but if he busts with a stud contributor with his lack of FA/trades, then we may go 6-10 again, as our "core" is about what it is...average, and not getting much better. Who then, is our stud (out of nowhere potential Pro-Bowler) from out last couple of years picks? Humor Snake, but the talent is not there..JH might be pretty good, but anyone else? This is the whole point, we need to get a stud-need pick this year, else we may go 1-5 under TT and miss the 2009 playoffs. Great teams draft studs. We don't do that. 8-)
TT has only been involved with 4 drafts not 5. 5 drafts ago the Steelers hit on Rothlesberger and Max Starks while the Mike Sherman directed Packers added such talent Carrol, Joey Thomas, Donnell Washington. That has skewed the results. Since TT has been in charge here is the comparison:



Packers Steelers
IMPACT
Greg Jennings LaMarr Woodley
Aaron Rodgers Santonio Holmes
Nick Collins Heath Miller


STARTERS
Daryn Colledge Willie Colon
A.J. Hawk Chris Kemoeatu
Johnny Jolly Charles Davis
Jason Spitz
Korey Hall
Brady Poppinga
Mason Crosby

ON TEAM
Josh Sitton Lawrence Timmons
Jordy Nelson Rashard Mendenhall
Desmond Bishop Limas Sweed
Brandon Jackson William Gay
James Jones Trai Essex
Justin Harrell Tony Hills
Jeremy Thompson Bryant McFadden
Jermichael Finley Bruce Davis
DeShawn Wynn Matt Spaeth
Tony Moll Dennis Dixon
Will Blackmon
Matt Flynn
Mike Montgomery
Patrick Lee
Breno Giacomini
Brian Brohm
Allen Barbre
Aaron Rouse
Brett Swain

GONE
Abdul Hodge Noah Herron
William Whitticker Anthony Smith
Michael Hawkins Willie Reid
Tyrone Culver Shaun Nua
Marviel Underwood Ryan Mundy
Kurt Campbell Ryan McBean
Junius Coston Rian Wallace
Ingle Martin Orien Harris
David Clowney Omar Jacobs
Dave Tollefson Mike Humpal
Craig Bragg Marvin Philip
Cory Rodgers Fred Gibson
Clark Harris Daniel Sepulveda
Terrence Murphy Dallas Baker
Cedric Humes
Cameron Stephenson


Maybe I am a bit of a homer, but I like our drafts better.

Things to consider:

Packers should have more starters because they are less deep than the Steelers

Very subjective in determining who constitutes an 'impact' player

I think several of the Packer ON TEAM column will be starters soon and some of the STARTERS could become IMPACT this season.

Packers have had higher draft position than the Steelers and should do better.

[SnakeLH2006]

Not so much..Not to base on argument on The Sporting News, but their draft/analysis makes them the "best" print media for NFL draft analysis.

The latest Sporting News did any interesting rating/look at the last 5 drafts for EVERY team (although subjective it did list how someone is an elite player...Pro Bowls or massive stats for their position). The Steelers got a very high drafting grade for the past 5 years with 4 "elite" players...aka studs with far fewer draft picks than TT has had (49). With those 49 (by far the highest in the NFL over the last 5 years), Ted has hit 1 elite player.

This is the whole point. He's laying his eggs in 1 basket. He knows talent, but they gave him a C (and Snake couldn't argue that either...49 picks, 1 elite, and comparing it to other teams, many busted picks, many gone off the roster). So to stay objective, his drafting has been lackluster. Go read it, it's a good read, and Snake isn't here to bust TT's balls, just saying he really needs to get some "difference makers" through the draft, not just average players.

As far as an above post made about FA...yes Woodson is a beast...but all the resignings are OK too, but none of them "made us better"....we "already" had them. Great we locked them up, but so many NFL teams do that nowadays. I hate FA, but most teams lock up the core, WE "under TT" are no different than most all teams. The elite teams draft elite players to continue their playoff excursions...We do not under Ted.

That Sporting News article made several valid, factual posts about drafting in the last 5 years...TT is quite average at best at the draft regardless of his enormous amount of picks. The old adage is "you get what you pay for" and it's pretty true.

To stay on topic....Snake likes TT, but damn if he doesn't need to get a beast to do something for once as a rookie THIS YEAR. Wells, Crabtree...are/will be prob. great, but if he busts with a stud contributor with his lack of FA/trades, then we may go 6-10 again, as our "core" is about what it is...average, and not getting much better. Who then, is our stud (out of nowhere potential Pro-Bowler) from out last couple of years picks? Humor Snake, but the talent is not there..JH might be pretty good, but anyone else? This is the whole point, we need to get a stud-need pick this year, else we may go 1-5 under TT and miss the 2009 playoffs. Great teams draft studs. We don't do that. 8-)
TT has only been involved with 4 drafts not 5. 5 drafts ago the Steelers hit on Rothlesberger and Max Starks while the Mike Sherman directed Packers added such talent Carrol, Joey Thomas, Donnell Washington. That has skewed the results. Since TT has been in charge here is the comparison:



Packers Steelers
IMPACT
Greg Jennings LaMarr Woodley
Aaron Rodgers Santonio Holmes
Nick Collins Heath Miller


STARTERS
Daryn Colledge Willie Colon
A.J. Hawk Chris Kemoeatu
Johnny Jolly Charles Davis
Jason Spitz
Korey Hall
Brady Poppinga
Mason Crosby

ON TEAM
Josh Sitton Lawrence Timmons
Jordy Nelson Rashard Mendenhall
Desmond Bishop Limas Sweed
Brandon Jackson William Gay
James Jones Trai Essex
Justin Harrell Tony Hills
Jeremy Thompson Bryant McFadden
Jermichael Finley Bruce Davis
DeShawn Wynn Matt Spaeth
Tony Moll Dennis Dixon
Will Blackmon
Matt Flynn
Mike Montgomery
Patrick Lee
Breno Giacomini
Brian Brohm
Allen Barbre
Aaron Rouse
Brett Swain

GONE
Abdul Hodge Noah Herron
William Whitticker Anthony Smith
Michael Hawkins Willie Reid
Tyrone Culver Shaun Nua
Marviel Underwood Ryan Mundy
Kurt Campbell Ryan McBean
Junius Coston Rian Wallace
Ingle Martin Orien Harris
David Clowney Omar Jacobs
Dave Tollefson Mike Humpal
Craig Bragg Marvin Philip
Cory Rodgers Fred Gibson
Clark Harris Daniel Sepulveda
Terrence Murphy Dallas Baker
Cedric Humes
Cameron Stephenson


Maybe I am a bit of a homer, but I like our drafts better.

Things to consider:

Packers should have more starters because they are less deep than the Steelers

Very subjective in determining who constitutes an 'impact' player

I think several of the Packer ON TEAM column will be starters soon and some of the STARTERS could become IMPACT this season.

Packers have had higher draft position than the Steelers and should do better.

True, and Snake is not really disagreeing with it as it is all subjective. Yet, I fail to see where we are adding these elite players via the draft. Yes, we added Pickett and Woodson, etc. via FA, but the article was just talking draft, as most teams will add a top-notch FA here or there over 5 years. I have no probs with laying low in FA at all, but the Pack is the slowest team to acquire players by any means OTHER than the draft, thus, that is where we must get those beast-type players esp. considering the slow offseasons of the past 2 seasons.

When you rarely augment your roster via trades/FA as TT has done the last 2 years, the infusion of talent hinges on the draft. When you are getting pretty decent players, that is not enough to leapfrong into contender status when so many other teams hit these studs a little more frequently (AP in Minnesota for ex. who produced immediately), make a major trade (Cutler to the Bears), or use FA (Vikes' Hutchinson OG) for example. We are then limited to get exponentially better as the draft takes a few years to develop (not to say lower round picks can't be studs, but is unlikely year 1 which we need now coming off 6-10). That's why I'm advocating going for a need pick this year (as maybe an OT's ceiling may not be as high as say Oropoko, Curry, Wells, or Crabtree) but they will offer more of a contribution to winning in 2009 which we need most likely.

[Fritz]

Don't forget, too, that TT's first wave of players are coming up for contract as well as the likes of Kampman. Why blow wads of cash on the Chris Cantys of the world when you've got to re-sign Jennings & Co.?

The next two years will tell the tale of Ted's tenure.

Say that three times, fast.

[sharpe1027]

Double post.

[sharpe1027]

When you rarely augment your roster via trades/FA as TT has done the last 2 years, the infusion of talent hinges on the draft.

When you are good at augmenting your roster via trades/FA as the Packers have done the last 4 years, the infusion of talent does not hinge only on the draft.

My point for the Snake is still, do you have any kind of support for your statement other than the perception out there? Granted, I am pretty sure you will find teams that are more active, but I am also pretty sure you will find many teams that are less active. IMHO, the Packers have have had success in free agency and trades as well some failures, but the failures did not come with large cap hits.

I don't know, maybe they havee been much less active than the average NFL team with their free agency and trades. I still haven't seen a good analysis to support that perception. :?:

[SnakeLH2006]

When you rarely augment your roster via trades/FA as TT has done the last 2 years, the infusion of talent hinges on the draft.

When you are good at augmenting your roster via trades/FA as the Packers have done the last 4 years, the infusion of talent does not hinge only on the draft.

My point for the Snake is still, do you have any kind of support for your statement other than the perception out there? Granted, I am pretty sure you will find teams that are more active, but I am also pretty sure you will find many teams that are less active. IMHO, the Packers have have had success in free agency and trades as well some failures, but the failures did not come with large cap hits.

I don't know, maybe they havee been much less active than the average NFL team with their free agency and trades. I still haven't seen a good analysis to support that perception. :?:

Sharpe, you kind of answered you own question. Growing within is fine, but it is a slow growth..Snake's not glorifying trades/FA so much as the draft is the meal ticket (which is fine) under TT. Just stressing he really needs to get a guy who'll make a difference year 1 through the draft in 2009. I abhor FA and like resigning our guys, as most do, just saying 1 out of 49 picks over that time frame have become studs (Jennings and Arod is close) but at 6-10 all the eggs are in 1 basket, and he needs to strike oil, not only for the future, but for 2009 for us to get MUCH better and become the elite contender we all hope the Pack will be.

[sharpe1027]

Sharpe, you kind of answered you own question. Growing within is fine, but it is a slow growth..Snake's not glorifying trades/FA so much as the draft is the meal ticket (which is fine) under TT. Just stressing he really needs to get a guy who'll make a difference year 1 through the draft in 2009. I abhor FA and like resigning our guys, as most do, just saying 1 out of 49 picks over that time frame have become studs (Jennings and Arod is close) but at 6-10 all the eggs are in 1 basket, and he needs to strike oil, not only for the future, but for 2009 for us to get MUCH better and become the elite contender we all hope the Pack will be.

I think I am not getting my point across. I contend that the Packers ARE active in free agency and trades, just that people have unrealistic ideas on what most other teams do.

That being said, I also disagree that he has to get a guy that will make a difference this year in the draft. First of all, other than Favre (not to be discounted), the team is largely the same as the 13-3 team. As badly as the defense played for the second half of the year, I think the coordinator change can only improve the team.

Second, I think it is more likely, and just as productive, if some of the guys already on the roster step up and fills that role. I think there are some good possibilities (Finely, Nelson, Sitton, T. Will, J. Thompson, Harrell, Barbre, Bigby, B. Jackson ect...). So I am not buying that they must have an immediate stud from this years the draft.

[Gunakor]

Just stressing he really needs to get a guy who'll make a difference year 1 through the draft in 2009.

Snake,

Why does TT have to get a rookie that will make an impact right away? Why isn't it okay for him to draft a rookie and further develop him so that he'll be an impact player in a year or two?


at 6-10 all the eggs are in 1 basket, and he needs to strike oil, not only for the future, but for 2009 for us to get MUCH better and become the elite contender we all hope the Pack will be.

Yet you put all of our eggs in one basket when saying we need to draft an immediate starter who will make this huge impact as a rookie in 2009. There is nothing wrong with TT drafting a raw talent with huge upside that he can develop into an impact player in a year or two. Because if we win a Super Bowl in 2011 with the #9 pick in the 2009 draft contributing to that victory/season, how could you bust TT's balls for that #9 pick not being an impact player in 2009?

I mean, from that perspective, does it matter when a guy becomes an impact player? No, only that he DOES become an impact player. Suppose AJ Hawk or, god help me for mentioning the name, Justin Harrell become impact players this season - even if the #9 pick does not. We win the division and host a playoff game partly as a result of Hawk and Harrell's significant contributions. Is TT still a horrible GM for not drafting players who make an immediate impact?

I guess I personally would give him credit for finding good football players in the draft, and then give credit to the coaching staff for developing them into great football players in the NFL. Even if it didn't happen right away.

This is another of those scenarios where I have to remind everyone that the upcoming season is not the very last one the NFL will play. Please, don't put all of our eggs in one basket.

[SnakeLH2006]

Sharpe and Gunakor, I agree with both of you. But Snake feels that mediocrity and just getting to the playoffs in 2009 is kind of failure considering we were so close the SB 2 years ago.

Does Snake think TT is a bad GM? No, and far from it. But for once it would be nice to get an impact player to produce right away. Woodson was the last one to do just that years ago and that was FA. That's fine. But to take the next step, as it's proven with FA, et al, that it's very possible to go from 6-10 to Super Bowl. Look at Arizona. Yet, we might have that this year if ALL the chips fall into place. That would be quite excellent. But if it all goes to shit the point of the topic was to say if we go 4-12 with no one excelling in 2009, TT's days are numbered. I don't wish to see that at all, but let's get that need pick instead of waiting 2 years for Crabby or Wells to take that step.

If TT"s picks them, sobeit...Snake is Packer fan first and foremost, and will support the pick, but really those OT's were bad last year, so getting one of them or a top notch NT would really help us much more this year and may turn out to be just as good if not better anyway than the hyped BPA, as that has not worked out for Ted thus far at all. Bottom Line: Let's just win and we all are happy. :)

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

Then again, this just came from another topic, so what's up with this?


There have been plenty of impressive rookie starters at LB over the years. But if they really want to draft a guy at #9 that could come in and be an effective starter right away, any of the top 4 OT's would likely win the RT starting job as a rookie. But I honestly don't think our starting LB's are that bad. Certainly not bad enough to warrant a #9 pick to replace one of them out of necessity.

Isn't this what Snake has been saying? :duel: Why battle it, we seem to agree. No??

[wist43]

FYI, yes, you guys are "homers"... would rather have the Packers roster than the Steelers???

Rose colored glasses doesn't begin to describe that level of delusion... The Steelers just won a Superbowl - remember the Superbowl??? Remember 13 years ago??? 13 years AND COUNTING!!!! I say and counting, b/c no way do we win it in 2009.

Granted the Steelers have better offensive and defensive systems in place, and they do a much better job of scouting and filling specific roles, but that speaks to the point of TT's misleading this team into mediocrity - I wanted TT to adopt the Steeler philosophies when he was hired, instead he went ZBS, and passive defense.

Now, here we are 4 years later, and we've scraped the passive D, that side of the ball is completely poplulated with inadequate 4-3 personnel, the OL is still a flaming mess, and you guys would rather have the Packers roster than the Steelers???

Yes, you guys are homers, lol :lol:

[Fritz]

Fritz has decided to start collecting the names of all ye non-believers, oh Wist (you, Red, Packnut, for three starters) and when the day of judgement comes, when the Pack goes 10-6 or 11-5 or 12-4 this year and goes to the playoffs, then will Fritz be tempted to smote thee with thine own words of doubt.

But Fritz will refrain. For the mighty Fritz, who knows all and tells none, is prepared for thy inevitable response, ye doubters - that this will be "luck," that they weren't that good....Yes, Fritz knows. Thus, Fritz will bide his time, and after the 2010 season, when the Packers are established Super Bowl contenders, then Fritz will unveil the flaming Sword of Justice and Retribution, and ye unbelieivers, ye shall fall upon thy knees, humbled in sackcloth and drenched in playoff appearances.

[SnakeLH2006]

Fritz has decided to start collecting the names of all ye non-believers, oh Wist (you, Red, Packnut, for three starters) and when the day of judgement comes, when the Pack goes 10-6 or 11-5 or 12-4 this year and goes to the playoffs, then will Fritz be tempted to smote thee with thine own words of doubt.

But Fritz will refrain. For the mighty Fritz, who knows all and tells none, is prepared for thy inevitable response, ye doubters - that this will be "luck," that they weren't that good....Yes, Fritz knows. Thus, Fritz will bide his time, and after the 2010 season, when the Packers are established Super Bowl contenders, then Fritz will unveil the flaming Sword of Justice and Retribution, and ye unbelieivers, ye shall fall upon thy knees, humbled in sackcloth and drenched in playoff appearances.

Very eloquent Fritzy (like the new 3rd person do ya?..it's fun, no?...lol)...ss Snakey wouldn't be surprised if we became SB contenders, but the playoffs are first and foremost. Do it TT.

Seems like a lot of changes this year on D, esp., but maybe the players we have can do it, but to think that when we went 13-3 recently, it was a big boon to be relatively injury free for the most part. Yes, we easily make the 2009 playoffs, Snake would think, if we stay injury free again, but alas, we do need some upgrades to perpetually be contenders, or in the right now, make the 2009 playoffs. Those injuries sucked, but, regardless, our rooks have had average upside in the past few TT drafts, so it seems (maybe I'm wrong) but a couple of top picks this year to augment some future Pro-Bowlisming (new word) would really help us for once. Yes, we need to grow within as the past few years under TT, trades and FA have been limited, but so to have been his drafts...Pretty average, nothing to write home about, though.

Ye whom doleth playoff justice forth, thou hast Fritzy shalt invoke 3rd person to be spared the future wrath of draft day's suffering of perpectually being stamped in playoff lacketh toil....

That's fun stuff. :D

[sharpe1027]

Sharpe and Gunakor, I agree with both of you. But Snake feels that mediocrity and just getting to the playoffs in 2009 is kind of failure considering we were so close the SB 2 years ago.

Does Snake think TT is a bad GM? No, and far from it. But for once it would be nice to get an impact player to produce right away. Woodson was the last one to do just that years ago and that was FA. That's fine. But to take the next step, as it's proven with FA, et al, that it's very possible to go from 6-10 to Super Bowl. Look at Arizona. Yet, we might have that this year if ALL the chips fall into place. That would be quite excellent. But if it all goes to shit the point of the topic was to say if we go 4-12 with no one excelling in 2009, TT's days are numbered. I don't wish to see that at all, but let's get that need pick instead of waiting 2 years for Crabby or Wells to take that step.

If TT"s picks them, sobeit...Snake is Packer fan first and foremost, and will support the pick, but really those OT's were bad last year, so getting one of them or a top notch NT would really help us much more this year and may turn out to be just as good if not better anyway than the hyped BPA, as that has not worked out for Ted thus far at all. Bottom Line: Let's just win and we all are happy. :)


The discussion, for me, was whether or not an immediate stud (near probowl level?) player was needed from this year's draft. I disagree with the premise that this level of player must be found in this year's draft because of a perceived lack of activity in free agency and trades. Obviously it would be nice to have one.

[SnakeLH2006]

Sharpe and Gunakor, I agree with both of you. But Snake feels that mediocrity and just getting to the playoffs in 2009 is kind of failure considering we were so close the SB 2 years ago.

Does Snake think TT is a bad GM? No, and far from it. But for once it would be nice to get an impact player to produce right away. Woodson was the last one to do just that years ago and that was FA. That's fine. But to take the next step, as it's proven with FA, et al, that it's very possible to go from 6-10 to Super Bowl. Look at Arizona. Yet, we might have that this year if ALL the chips fall into place. That would be quite excellent. But if it all goes to shit the point of the topic was to say if we go 4-12 with no one excelling in 2009, TT's days are numbered. I don't wish to see that at all, but let's get that need pick instead of waiting 2 years for Crabby or Wells to take that step.

If TT"s picks them, sobeit...Snake is Packer fan first and foremost, and will support the pick, but really those OT's were bad last year, so getting one of them or a top notch NT would really help us much more this year and may turn out to be just as good if not better anyway than the hyped BPA, as that has not worked out for Ted thus far at all. Bottom Line: Let's just win and we all are happy. :)


The discussion, for me, was whether or not an immediate stud (near probowl level?) player was needed from this year's draft. I disagree with the premise that this level of player must be found in this year's draft because of a perceived lack of activity in free agency and trades. Obviously it would be nice to have one.

I agree to a point Sharpe, but then again, we'll have to stay injury free for us to go 10-6. Possible? Yes. But I don't see many young guys stepping up this year from the previous drafts to elevate us if injuries happen (most likely will occur), thus my stance for an impact rookie for once.

I've been mellowing over the last week about it though, and Snake would be happy for a stud (whether it's over 1-3 years)..Just would be nice for once to get that stud in year 1...if not, and if injuries occur again, it looks like TT might miss the playoffs for the 4th time in 5 years (thus, back to topic, if we tank again....this may be it for Big Time Ted). :shock:

[sharpe1027]

I agree to a point Sharpe, but then again, we'll have to stay injury free for us to go 10-6. Possible? Yes. But I don't see many young guys stepping up this year from the previous drafts to elevate us if injuries happen (most likely will occur), thus my stance for an impact rookie for once.

I've been mellowing over the last week about it though, and Snake would be happy for a stud (whether it's over 1-3 years)..Just would be nice for once to get that stud in year 1...if not, and if injuries occur again, it looks like TT might miss the playoffs for the 4th time in 5 years (thus, back to topic, if we tank again....this may be it for Big Time Ted). :shock:

I don't know about injury free, just not decimated at certain positions. Even with some pretty big injuries to the defense last year, they were competive in almost every game. They were able to take injuries on the O-line, cornerback and saftey positions without imploding. The loses of the D-line and LBer positions are what really hurt, IMO.

You don't see Rodgers as a possible guy to make a big step forward this year? How about T. Will? Bigby? Finley? Colledge? Sitton? Harrell? J. Thompson? Nelson? Jackson? Maybe none of these guys will step up, but I think you can agree that it is not too far-fetch to have a reasonable hope that a few of the guys will.

I agree that it is time to win for this group. If MM can't get it done, he needs to go and TT should be right behind him.

[Waldo]

FYI, yes, you guys are "homers"... would rather have the Packers roster than the Steelers???

I'd take their defensive front 7 and Troy P....

But I surely would take our offense over theirs and our secondary (swap Troy P for Bigby).

Offensively, it isn't even close. The Packers are a high powered offense. The Steelers are good enough to get by with their defense.

At some point you have to recognize historical identity. The Packers, just like the Steelers, have not lost sight of who they are for a very long time. The Packers are an air superiority team. Minus a few years here and there, that goes back all the way to WW2 for us. In good times and bad, when we win and are a good team, we do it the Packer way, shred their secondary.

The Steelers are a good team, and are riding a high right now, but the Packers way of winning works too, we've proven it before, and we'll prove it again.

[PackerBlues]

Teams GB lost to last year (10 of them) and their final records:


Dallas: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC East... Beat GB 27-16

Tampa Bay: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC South... Beat GB 30-21

Atlanta: 11-5 ended up 2nd in NFC South... Beat GB 27-24

Tennesee: ended up 1st in AFC South... Beat GB 19-16

Vikings: 10-6 ended up 1st in NFC North... Beat GB 28-27

New Orleans: 8-8 ended up last in NFC South... Beat GB 51-29

Panthers: 12-4 ended up 1st in NFC South... Beat GB 35-31

Houston: 8-8 ended up 3rd in AFC South... Beat GB 24-21

Jaguars: 5-11 ended up last in AFC South... Beat GB 20-16

Chicago: 9-7 ended up 2nd in NFC North... Beat GB 20-17

The Packers 6 wins came against the Vikings in the season opener in GB, two wins against the great 0-16 Lions, a Seatle team that sucked ass, the Colts in GB (woot! Bite it Manning!), and Chicago.

Does this sound like a Packer team that is going to improve that damned much through the draft? Not likely. Every year since Thompson came to town its been the same damned thing. It seems like the most exciting thing Packer fans get to look forward to every year is the draft. :roll:

I read through all of the posts in this thread......people still expecting Harrell to be the second coming of Reggie White.....sad. I think he may be the second coming of Clitedious Hunt, and thats if we are lucky.

Face it, the Packers have done nothing but slump under Thompson. Keep telling yourselves that "next year" will be better. Keep telling anyone who will still listen to you, that Thompson's drafts will make this team better.......some day. One or two draft picks out of 10 or so every year (thanks to Thompson always trading down, not up) is not going to turn this team around.

Anyone think Thompson will trade up this year? Not likely. Anyone think Thompson will use a draft pick or two to trade for another teams stud during the draft? Not likely. This year will be the same as any other, Thompson may actually use his 1st round pick at #9, but I fully expect him to trade down more again this year........How exciting, lol. :roll:

How many starters will Thompson get out of the draft this year? How many new starters would the team need to improve from 6-10? How many more years will Thompson get to squander the talent that the team has now?

[Bossman641]

Teams GB lost to last year (10 of them) and their final records:


Dallas: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC East... Beat GB 27-16

Tampa Bay: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC South... Beat GB 30-21

Atlanta: 11-5 ended up 2nd in NFC South... Beat GB 27-24

Tennesee: ended up 1st in AFC South... Beat GB 19-16

Vikings: 10-6 ended up 1st in NFC North... Beat GB 28-27

New Orleans: 8-8 ended up last in NFC South... Beat GB 51-29

Panthers: 12-4 ended up 1st in NFC South... Beat GB 35-31

Houston: 8-8 ended up 3rd in AFC South... Beat GB 24-21

Jaguars: 5-11 ended up last in AFC South... Beat GB 20-16

Chicago: 9-7 ended up 2nd in NFC North... Beat GB 20-17

The Packers 6 wins came against the Vikings in the season opener in GB, two wins against the great 0-16 Lions, a Seatle team that sucked ass, the Colts in GB (woot! Bite it Manning!), and Chicago.

Does this sound like a Packer team that is going to improve that damned much through the draft? Not likely. Every year since Thompson came to town its been the same damned thing. It seems like the most exciting thing Packer fans get to look forward to every year is the draft. :roll:

I read through all of the posts in this thread......people still expecting Harrell to be the second coming of Reggie White.....sad. I think he may be the second coming of Clitedious Hunt, and thats if we are lucky.

Face it, the Packers have done nothing but slump under Thompson. Keep telling yourselves that "next year" will be better. Keep telling anyone who will still listen to you, that Thompson's drafts will make this team better.......some day. One or two draft picks out of 10 or so every year (thanks to Thompson always trading down, not up) is not going to turn this team around.

Anyone think Thompson will trade up this year? Not likely. Anyone think Thompson will use a draft pick or two to trade for another teams stud during the draft? Not likely. This year will be the same as any other, Thompson may actually use his 1st round pick at #9, but I fully expect him to trade down more again this year........How exciting, lol. :roll:

How many starters will Thompson get out of the draft this year? How many new starters would the team need to improve from 6-10? How many more years will Thompson get to squander the talent that the team has now?

That 2007 season when we were "this" close to going to the SB must have been a real bummer for you PB.

[wist43]

FYI, yes, you guys are "homers"... would rather have the Packers roster than the Steelers???

I'd take their defensive front 7 and Troy P....

But I surely would take our offense over theirs and our secondary (swap Troy P for Bigby).

Offensively, it isn't even close. The Packers are a high powered offense. The Steelers are good enough to get by with their defense.

At some point you have to recognize historical identity. The Packers, just like the Steelers, have not lost sight of who they are for a very long time. The Packers are an air superiority team. Minus a few years here and there, that goes back all the way to WW2 for us. In good times and bad, when we win and are a good team, we do it the Packer way, shred their secondary.

The Steelers are a good team, and are riding a high right now, but the Packers way of winning works too, we've proven it before, and we'll prove it again.

True... however, I'm a defense first guy; and, while GB's offense may put up better numbers, the Steelers philosophy of grinding an opponent down is much more effective over the long haul IMO.

To the Steelers, punting isn't the end of the world... In GB, punting means giving up points.

[PackerBlues]

Teams GB lost to last year (10 of them) and their final records:


Dallas: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC East... Beat GB 27-16

Tampa Bay: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC South... Beat GB 30-21

Atlanta: 11-5 ended up 2nd in NFC South... Beat GB 27-24

Tennesee: ended up 1st in AFC South... Beat GB 19-16

Vikings: 10-6 ended up 1st in NFC North... Beat GB 28-27

New Orleans: 8-8 ended up last in NFC South... Beat GB 51-29

Panthers: 12-4 ended up 1st in NFC South... Beat GB 35-31

Houston: 8-8 ended up 3rd in AFC South... Beat GB 24-21

Jaguars: 5-11 ended up last in AFC South... Beat GB 20-16

Chicago: 9-7 ended up 2nd in NFC North... Beat GB 20-17

The Packers 6 wins came against the Vikings in the season opener in GB, two wins against the great 0-16 Lions, a Seatle team that sucked ass, the Colts in GB (woot! Bite it Manning!), and Chicago.

Does this sound like a Packer team that is going to improve that damned much through the draft? Not likely. Every year since Thompson came to town its been the same damned thing. It seems like the most exciting thing Packer fans get to look forward to every year is the draft. :roll:

I read through all of the posts in this thread......people still expecting Harrell to be the second coming of Reggie White.....sad. I think he may be the second coming of Clitedious Hunt, and thats if we are lucky.

Face it, the Packers have done nothing but slump under Thompson. Keep telling yourselves that "next year" will be better. Keep telling anyone who will still listen to you, that Thompson's drafts will make this team better.......some day. One or two draft picks out of 10 or so every year (thanks to Thompson always trading down, not up) is not going to turn this team around.

Anyone think Thompson will trade up this year? Not likely. Anyone think Thompson will use a draft pick or two to trade for another teams stud during the draft? Not likely. This year will be the same as any other, Thompson may actually use his 1st round pick at #9, but I fully expect him to trade down more again this year........How exciting, lol. :roll:

How many starters will Thompson get out of the draft this year? How many new starters would the team need to improve from 6-10? How many more years will Thompson get to squander the talent that the team has now?

That 2007 season when we were "this" close to going to the SB must have been a real bummer for you PB.

Nah, didn't bum me out at all. We had Favre, and it was exciting watching Favre carry such an average team....nothing like the all to average Mr. Rogers, who so far, does not seem to have "IT". Nice stats for the average Mr. Rogers, but there is nothing special there.

[Waldo]

FYI, yes, you guys are "homers"... would rather have the Packers roster than the Steelers???

I'd take their defensive front 7 and Troy P....

But I surely would take our offense over theirs and our secondary (swap Troy P for Bigby).

Offensively, it isn't even close. The Packers are a high powered offense. The Steelers are good enough to get by with their defense.

At some point you have to recognize historical identity. The Packers, just like the Steelers, have not lost sight of who they are for a very long time. The Packers are an air superiority team. Minus a few years here and there, that goes back all the way to WW2 for us. In good times and bad, when we win and are a good team, we do it the Packer way, shred their secondary.

The Steelers are a good team, and are riding a high right now, but the Packers way of winning works too, we've proven it before, and we'll prove it again.

True... however, I'm a defense first guy; and, while GB's offense may put up better numbers, the Steelers philosophy of grinding an opponent down is much more effective over the long haul IMO.

To the Steelers, punting isn't the end of the world... In GB, punting means giving up points.

Well if you don't like the Packers philosophy to football, my guess is you probably are going to want to switch teams, and I'm not sure how you became a Packer fan in the first place. My guess is the Packers identity is something that they make an effort to keep intact and will do so for a very long time. Like eternity.

Grinding you down..........

That is how the Bears play ball.

[Bossman641]

Teams GB lost to last year (10 of them) and their final records:


Dallas: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC East... Beat GB 27-16

Tampa Bay: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC South... Beat GB 30-21

Atlanta: 11-5 ended up 2nd in NFC South... Beat GB 27-24

Tennesee: ended up 1st in AFC South... Beat GB 19-16

Vikings: 10-6 ended up 1st in NFC North... Beat GB 28-27

New Orleans: 8-8 ended up last in NFC South... Beat GB 51-29

Panthers: 12-4 ended up 1st in NFC South... Beat GB 35-31

Houston: 8-8 ended up 3rd in AFC South... Beat GB 24-21

Jaguars: 5-11 ended up last in AFC South... Beat GB 20-16

Chicago: 9-7 ended up 2nd in NFC North... Beat GB 20-17

The Packers 6 wins came against the Vikings in the season opener in GB, two wins against the great 0-16 Lions, a Seatle team that sucked ass, the Colts in GB (woot! Bite it Manning!), and Chicago.

Does this sound like a Packer team that is going to improve that damned much through the draft? Not likely. Every year since Thompson came to town its been the same damned thing. It seems like the most exciting thing Packer fans get to look forward to every year is the draft. :roll:

I read through all of the posts in this thread......people still expecting Harrell to be the second coming of Reggie White.....sad. I think he may be the second coming of Clitedious Hunt, and thats if we are lucky.

Face it, the Packers have done nothing but slump under Thompson. Keep telling yourselves that "next year" will be better. Keep telling anyone who will still listen to you, that Thompson's drafts will make this team better.......some day. One or two draft picks out of 10 or so every year (thanks to Thompson always trading down, not up) is not going to turn this team around.

Anyone think Thompson will trade up this year? Not likely. Anyone think Thompson will use a draft pick or two to trade for another teams stud during the draft? Not likely. This year will be the same as any other, Thompson may actually use his 1st round pick at #9, but I fully expect him to trade down more again this year........How exciting, lol. :roll:

How many starters will Thompson get out of the draft this year? How many new starters would the team need to improve from 6-10? How many more years will Thompson get to squander the talent that the team has now?

That 2007 season when we were "this" close to going to the SB must have been a real bummer for you PB.

Nah, didn't bum me out at all. We had Favre, and it was exciting watching Favre carry such an average team....nothing like the all to average Mr. Rogers, who so far, does not seem to have "IT". Nice stats for the average Mr. Rogers, but there is nothing special there.

Average team? I'm not gonna get into this again because it's been covered far too many times. The 2007 team was far from average. The main difference was they had a defense that actually stopped people from time to time and didn't hemorrhage points like the 2008 defense. Unless Favre was suiting up on defense or you want to trot out the tired "Favre inspired the team (really? DEFENSE and SPECIAL TEAMS?)" BS I'm not buying the Favre carrying the average team line.

[Zool]

Steelers were 5th in the league in TOP and the Packers 10th.

http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stats/?cat=team&pan=14

Packers were 17th in rushing ypg, Steelers 23rd.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=team&sort=rypg&pos=off&league=nfl&season=2&year=2008

Packers Team Rushing - 437, 1805, 4.1
Steelers Team Rushing - 460, 1690, 3.7

So the Steelers ground opponents down to the tune of 1.4 extra rushes per game and -.4 yards per carry.

Just for kicks

Bears were:
29th in TOP
24th in Rushing YPG
434, 1673, 3.9

Vikings were:
9th in TOP
5th in Rush YPG
519, 2332, 4.5

This misconception about the Packers O is getting out of hand. While I will agree with Wist about 98% of the time with his stand on the other side of the ball, the O is just fine. 1st year starting QB making some shaky decisions early in the season is about as common as you can get. The guy got better as the season went on as would be expected.

If Capers and the staff can get the D at least to respectable again this season, it will be a good year. If they can build a top 10 D deep playoff runs will be had.

[PlantPage55]

Does this sound like a Packer team that is going to improve that damned much through the draft? Not likely. Every year since Thompson came to town its been the same damned thing.

Go back 1 year. Does this (2007) Packer team sound like one that is going to lose 9 more games than they did this year?

There was so much wrong with your post that it gave me cancer.

[cheesner]

The discussion, for me, was whether or not an immediate stud (near probowl level?) player was needed from this year's draft. I disagree with the premise that this level of player must be found in this year's draft because of a perceived lack of activity in free agency and trades. Obviously it would be nice to have one.

We will be adding at least 3 'studs' this season. Cullen Jenkins; Nick Barnett, and Atari Bigby. There may be a player or 2 that also emerge this season into studs: Hawk, Jolly, and Harrell.

But requiring to get a 'stud' from the draft for success? Not necessary.

[cheesner]

never mind

[wist43]

FYI, yes, you guys are "homers"... would rather have the Packers roster than the Steelers???

I'd take their defensive front 7 and Troy P....

But I surely would take our offense over theirs and our secondary (swap Troy P for Bigby).

Offensively, it isn't even close. The Packers are a high powered offense. The Steelers are good enough to get by with their defense.

At some point you have to recognize historical identity. The Packers, just like the Steelers, have not lost sight of who they are for a very long time. The Packers are an air superiority team. Minus a few years here and there, that goes back all the way to WW2 for us. In good times and bad, when we win and are a good team, we do it the Packer way, shred their secondary.

The Steelers are a good team, and are riding a high right now, but the Packers way of winning works too, we've proven it before, and we'll prove it again.

True... however, I'm a defense first guy; and, while GB's offense may put up better numbers, the Steelers philosophy of grinding an opponent down is much more effective over the long haul IMO.

To the Steelers, punting isn't the end of the world... In GB, punting means giving up points.

Well if you don't like the Packers philosophy to football, my guess is you probably are going to want to switch teams, and I'm not sure how you became a Packer fan in the first place. My guess is the Packers identity is something that they make an effort to keep intact and will do so for a very long time. Like eternity.

Grinding you down..........

That is how the Bears play ball.

Get a grip asshole...

B/C we don't agree on philosophy doesn't make me any less a Packer fan... been rooting for the Packers since the 60's.

[PackerBlues]

B/C we don't agree on philosophy doesn't make me any less a Packer fan... been rooting for the Packers since the 60's.

Thats how it works in these forums wist, lol....... if there is something in particular u dont care for about the Packers, chumps around here will call u less of a Packer fan.
Dont like Thompson? To these guys, that makes u less of a fan.
Dont think Rogers has shown anything special? Again, these guys will call u less of a fan.
Dont care for how Thompson is "building through the draft" (LMFAO!!!) Again, less of a fan. :roll:

you have about 20 more years of being a Packer fan under your belt than me Wist, and you have seen a lot worse from GM's than what I have seen.

[Waldo]

When have the Packers ever been a "grind you down and beat you with defense" team? Early Lombardi era?

The Packers are a "shred your pass defense" team and have been for a very long time.

You can't expect them to just change their identity.

[gex]

Teams GB lost to last year (10 of them) and their final records:


Dallas: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC East... Beat GB 27-16

Tampa Bay: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC South... Beat GB 30-21

Atlanta: 11-5 ended up 2nd in NFC South... Beat GB 27-24

Tennesee: ended up 1st in AFC South... Beat GB 19-16

Vikings: 10-6 ended up 1st in NFC North... Beat GB 28-27

New Orleans: 8-8 ended up last in NFC South... Beat GB 51-29

Panthers: 12-4 ended up 1st in NFC South... Beat GB 35-31

Houston: 8-8 ended up 3rd in AFC South... Beat GB 24-21

Jaguars: 5-11 ended up last in AFC South... Beat GB 20-16

Chicago: 9-7 ended up 2nd in NFC North... Beat GB 20-17

The Packers 6 wins came against the Vikings in the season opener in GB, two wins against the great 0-16 Lions, a Seatle team that sucked ass, the Colts in GB (woot! Bite it Manning!), and Chicago.

Does this sound like a Packer team that is going to improve that damned much through the draft? Not likely. Every year since Thompson came to town its been the same damned thing. It seems like the most exciting thing Packer fans get to look forward to every year is the draft. :roll:

I read through all of the posts in this thread......people still expecting Harrell to be the second coming of Reggie White.....sad. I think he may be the second coming of Clitedious Hunt, and thats if we are lucky.

Face it, the Packers have done nothing but slump under Thompson. Keep telling yourselves that "next year" will be better. Keep telling anyone who will still listen to you, that Thompson's drafts will make this team better.......some day. One or two draft picks out of 10 or so every year (thanks to Thompson always trading down, not up) is not going to turn this team around.

Anyone think Thompson will trade up this year? Not likely. Anyone think Thompson will use a draft pick or two to trade for another teams stud during the draft? Not likely. This year will be the same as any other, Thompson may actually use his 1st round pick at #9, but I fully expect him to trade down more again this year........How exciting, lol. :roll:

How many starters will Thompson get out of the draft this year? How many new starters would the team need to improve from 6-10? How many more years will Thompson get to squander the talent that the team has now?

Kool-aid drinking Lion fans were saying that about Matt Millon right up till he got fired. They really do think he is/was an exceptional GM. lol

[gex]

B/C we don't agree on philosophy doesn't make me any less a Packer fan... been rooting for the Packers since the 60's.

Thats how it works in these forums wist, lol....... if there is something in particular u dont care for about the Packers, chumps around here will call u less of a Packer fan.
Dont like Thompson? To these guys, that makes u less of a fan.
Dont think Rogers has shown anything special? Again, these guys will call u less of a fan.
Dont care for how Thompson is "building through the draft" (LMFAO!!!) Again, less of a fan. :roll:

you have about 20 more years of being a Packer fan under your belt than me Wist, and you have seen a lot worse from GM's than what I have seen.

Isn't that the truth.
Drink the kool-aid and think the way we do or you will be dismissed.
Hate Favre, Sherman sucked, TT is the savior....

[Zool]

Wow, amazing how a few people around here spew mindless shit and take as many cheap shots as they want, but can't handle the same in return.

[Fritz]

Teams GB lost to last year (10 of them) and their final records:


Dallas: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC East... Beat GB 27-16

Tampa Bay: 9-7 ended up 3rd in the NFC South... Beat GB 30-21

Atlanta: 11-5 ended up 2nd in NFC South... Beat GB 27-24

Tennesee: ended up 1st in AFC South... Beat GB 19-16

Vikings: 10-6 ended up 1st in NFC North... Beat GB 28-27

New Orleans: 8-8 ended up last in NFC South... Beat GB 51-29

Panthers: 12-4 ended up 1st in NFC South... Beat GB 35-31

Houston: 8-8 ended up 3rd in AFC South... Beat GB 24-21

Jaguars: 5-11 ended up last in AFC South... Beat GB 20-16

Chicago: 9-7 ended up 2nd in NFC North... Beat GB 20-17

The Packers 6 wins came against the Vikings in the season opener in GB, two wins against the great 0-16 Lions, a Seatle team that sucked ass, the Colts in GB (woot! Bite it Manning!), and Chicago.

Does this sound like a Packer team that is going to improve that damned much through the draft? Not likely. Every year since Thompson came to town its been the same damned thing. It seems like the most exciting thing Packer fans get to look forward to every year is the draft. :roll:

I read through all of the posts in this thread......people still expecting Harrell to be the second coming of Reggie White.....sad. I think he may be the second coming of Clitedious Hunt, and thats if we are lucky.

Face it, the Packers have done nothing but slump under Thompson. Keep telling yourselves that "next year" will be better. Keep telling anyone who will still listen to you, that Thompson's drafts will make this team better.......some day. One or two draft picks out of 10 or so every year (thanks to Thompson always trading down, not up) is not going to turn this team around.

Anyone think Thompson will trade up this year? Not likely. Anyone think Thompson will use a draft pick or two to trade for another teams stud during the draft? Not likely. This year will be the same as any other, Thompson may actually use his 1st round pick at #9, but I fully expect him to trade down more again this year........How exciting, lol. :roll:

How many starters will Thompson get out of the draft this year? How many new starters would the team need to improve from 6-10? How many more years will Thompson get to squander the talent that the team has now?

Kool-aid drinking Lion fans were saying that about Matt Millon right up till he got fired. They really do think he is/was an exceptional GM. lol

Oh, bullshit, Gex. Bullshit.

I live in the Detroit area. My friends are Leos fans. I listen to the Detroit talk radio. The last couple years, I did not hear one - not one, Gex - fan say that they though Millen was an "exceptional GM." Or a good GM.

Bullshit, Gex.

[Lurker64]

Why is it that some posters only show up here to complain about people in the front office, certain players, or the inevitable failure of certain schemes.

There's more than a few people I think who only hang out on Packer boards to argue whether the GM sucks or not and to take potshots at each other, when we really should be discussing things like "Who's the better late round five-technique defensive end prospect: Pannel Egboah or Everette Pedescleaux?" this time of year.

I mean, if you really care about the Packers, you should probably care more about the Defensive End than the General Manager.

[cpk1994]

Why is it that some posters only show up here to complain about people in the front office, certain players, or the inevitable failure of certain schemes.

There's more than a few people I think who only hang out on Packer boards to argue whether the GM sucks or not and to take potshots at each other, when we really should be discussing things like "Who's the better late round five-technique defensive end prospect: Pannel Egboah or Everette Pedescleaux?" this time of year.

I mean, if you really care about the Packers, you should probably care more about the Defensive End than the General Manager.IU'd love to debate those two players, but I have no idea who the hell they are. :D

[Lurker64]

Why is it that some posters only show up here to complain about people in the front office, certain players, or the inevitable failure of certain schemes.

There's more than a few people I think who only hang out on Packer boards to argue whether the GM sucks or not and to take potshots at each other, when we really should be discussing things like "Who's the better late round five-technique defensive end prospect: Pannel Egboah or Everette Pedescleaux?" this time of year.

I mean, if you really care about the Packers, you should probably care more about the Defensive End than the General Manager.IU'd love to debate those two players, but I have no idea who the hell they are. :D

Well, we can at least argue "Who would help the defensive line more: Raji or Tyson Jackson?" I think that's one we can all follow along. Let's talk about football, and not management.

[cheesner]

Why is it that some posters only show up here to complain about people in the front office, certain players, or the inevitable failure of certain schemes.

There's more than a few people I think who only hang out on Packer boards to argue whether the GM sucks or not and to take potshots at each other, when we really should be discussing things like "Who's the better late round five-technique defensive end prospect: Pannel Egboah or Everette Pedescleaux?" this time of year.

I mean, if you really care about the Packers, you should probably care more about the Defensive End than the General Manager.
Lurk, That would require football knowledge, some cognitive skills, and an ability to present thoughts and ideas in a organized manner supported by researched facts.

Without that you are left with: 'The Packers did poorly last year, what is the simplest answer (scapegoat) I can find?'

[cpk1994]

Why is it that some posters only show up here to complain about people in the front office, certain players, or the inevitable failure of certain schemes.

There's more than a few people I think who only hang out on Packer boards to argue whether the GM sucks or not and to take potshots at each other, when we really should be discussing things like "Who's the better late round five-technique defensive end prospect: Pannel Egboah or Everette Pedescleaux?" this time of year.

I mean, if you really care about the Packers, you should probably care more about the Defensive End than the General Manager.IU'd love to debate those two players, but I have no idea who the hell they are. :D

Well, we can at least argue "Who would help the defensive line more: Raji or Tyson Jackson?" I think that's one we can all follow along. Let's talk about football, and not management.To answer your question, in my opinion it would be Raji. YOu need someone to spell Pickett.

[Waldo]

Why is it that some posters only show up here to complain about people in the front office, certain players, or the inevitable failure of certain schemes.

There's more than a few people I think who only hang out on Packer boards to argue whether the GM sucks or not and to take potshots at each other, when we really should be discussing things like "Who's the better late round five-technique defensive end prospect: Pannel Egboah or Everette Pedescleaux?" this time of year.

I mean, if you really care about the Packers, you should probably care more about the Defensive End than the General Manager.IU'd love to debate those two players, but I have no idea who the hell they are. :D

Well, we can at least argue "Who would help the defensive line more: Raji or Tyson Jackson?" I think that's one we can all follow along. Let's talk about football, and not management.To answer your question, in my opinion it would be Raji. YOu need someone to spell Pickett.

A guy that plays 5-10 snaps a game spelling Pickett vs. a guy that is in competition with Harrell and Jolly to start next to Pickett

The NT comes out when the nickel back is on the field typically, unlike in the 4-3 where we always had to have 2 DT's on the field and took the SLB off. Just by changing defenses Picketts snaps go down 20% from what he played last year, even if he plays every single snap that a NT takes all season.

A 3-4 NT, while important, is a situational player, a 2 down player.

[Fritz]

It's interesting how some guys seem to "jump" so much right at the end of this whole process...no new workouts or anything, yet guys like Tyson Jackson, who spent the previous several weeks being talked about as mid-first rounders, are now seen as rapidly moving up the board. Same with Sanchez.

Weird.

[Partial]

It's interesting how some guys seem to "jump" so much right at the end of this whole process...no new workouts or anything, yet guys like Tyson Jackson, who spent the previous several weeks being talked about as mid-first rounders, are now seen as rapidly moving up the board. Same with Sanchez.

Weird.

I agree. I think its that more scouts are getting interviewed towards the end versus mostly speculation at the beginning? Don't know, but this seems to happen every year.

[SnakeLH2006]

Wow..shit got crazy in this topic over that last day (Rats dumping on Waldo.....wow, oh damn wow...but hey we all want a winner, no?), so I felt it was relevant to this topic too, to get it back in hand...This is Snake's quote from Patler's newer thread, but will paste it here cuz it makes sense too:


Snake don't hate on ole Shermy like many Rats do, and likes Ted overall (but takes some barbs at him at times)....but damn if Snake DID like going 10-6 or 12-4 EVERY year under Shermy and MAKE the playoffs...To those that will defend TT and say he wants a SB and that is the goal, was that not Shermy's goal too? Sobeit.

The playoffs are a crapshoot anyway, but at least he TRIED to strike gold in FA, etc. to keep us on top. Yeah, it hit rockbottom at 4-12 and he had to rebuild/get fired...But Snake has been real patient the past few years under TT, but it's looking like same old-same old every year now and several seem content building for the future.

Snake's giving it one mo' college try under TT, but we better make some big strides this year, else out for TT. It's always nice seeing TT get us those extra picks, but after 4 years, it's always, "well next year....we...". Fuck it. Let's fucking win already. Enough of it.

Sorry...<<End Mild Tantrum.

It's hard to hate Shermy though, and Snake never did, as it is routine in the NFL to go a few successful years and bottom out, but we need to reach some sort of pinnacle/or at least playoff routine under TT. It's getting old.

Yeah, I guess, Snake feels that is the bottom line...Too much sugar-coating and letting TT slide around here lately. We need wins and a perrenial playoff team, as looking at it now... 1 in 4 years is garbage. Looking at it like that....maybe Snake doesn't let TT slide anymore...

Once again. Big Draft...or TT better hope we have NO significant injuries to hinder us from going 10-6. Now thinking about it...Fuck it. Let's win. Sick of waiting for "next year". Snake's not scared of bashers as he likes TT overall, but this is win or done. Some say MM might go, but Snake sees TT joining him if you look at results.

Damn. Big draft....and we have several coming back from injuries...but let's see some results THIS year. And...This is on the big man (TT) he has what 3 guys from Wolf, and 5 from Shermy...so this is his team? No? I for one, would love to get to the playoffs...but thinking again about it, couldn't remember a time in my teens wondering IF we made the playoffs (it was a given)...so TT has no more Snake Slack. Just win.

[gex]

Wow..shit got crazy in this topic over that last day (Rats dumping on Waldo.....wow, oh damn wow...but hey we all want a winner, no?), so I felt it was relevant to this topic too, to get it back in hand...This is Snake's quote from Patler's newer thread, but will paste it here cuz it makes sense too:


Snake don't hate on ole Shermy like many Rats do, and likes Ted overall (but takes some barbs at him at times)....but damn if Snake DID like going 10-6 or 12-4 EVERY year under Shermy and MAKE the playoffs...To those that will defend TT and say he wants a SB and that is the goal, was that not Shermy's goal too? Sobeit.

The playoffs are a crapshoot anyway, but at least he TRIED to strike gold in FA, etc. to keep us on top. Yeah, it hit rockbottom at 4-12 and he had to rebuild/get fired...But Snake has been real patient the past few years under TT, but it's looking like same old-same old every year now and several seem content building for the future.

Snake's giving it one mo' college try under TT, but we better make some big strides this year, else out for TT. It's always nice seeing TT get us those extra picks, but after 4 years, it's always, "well next year....we...". Fuck it. Let's fucking win already. Enough of it.

Sorry...<<End Mild Tantrum.

It's hard to hate Shermy though, and Snake never did, as it is routine in the NFL to go a few successful years and bottom out, but we need to reach some sort of pinnacle/or at least playoff routine under TT. It's getting old.

Yeah, I guess, Snake feels that is the bottom line...Too much sugar-coating and letting TT slide around here lately. We need wins and a perrenial playoff team, as looking at it now... 1 in 4 years is garbage. Looking at it like that....maybe Snake doesn't let TT slide anymore...

Once again. Big Draft...or TT better hope we have NO significant injuries to hinder us from going 10-6. Now thinking about it...Fuck it. Let's win. Sick of waiting for "next year". Snake's not scared of bashers as he likes TT overall, but this is win or done. Some say MM might go, but Snake sees TT joining him if you look at results.

Damn. Big draft....and we have several coming back from injuries...but let's see some results THIS year. And...This is on the big man (TT) he has what 3 guys from Wolf, and 5 from Shermy...so this is his team? No? I for one, would love to get to the playoffs...but thinking again about it, couldn't remember a time in my teens wondering IF we made the playoffs (it was a given)...so TT has no more Snake Slack. Just win.

Ahh but Snake, there are soo many excuses that we can come up with as to why its everybody elses fault and not our Teddy.

[PackerBlues]

Why is it that some posters only show up here to complain about people in the front office, certain players, or the inevitable failure of certain schemes.

There's more than a few people I think who only hang out on Packer boards to argue whether the GM sucks or not and to take potshots at each other, when we really should be discussing things like "Who's the better late round five-technique defensive end prospect: Pannel Egboah or Everette Pedescleaux?" this time of year.

I mean, if you really care about the Packers, you should probably care more about the Defensive End than the General Manager.

If the original post is titled: Blind Faith: Is this TT's last year at GM?,
and I want to reply to that post, should I reply to it by talking about and sharing my opinions on Thompson, OR...............should I go completely off the original subject and talk about Defensive Ends?????

Get a Clue. :roll: You want to talk about "Who's the better late round five-technique defensive end prospect: Pannel Egboah or Everette Pedescleaux?".........start a thread on it and hope someone doesn't "pot shots" your opinions. Personally, I could give a rats ass about who Thompson picks up in the draft. Even a blind squirrel can find an acorn now and then. I am excited about the new Defense, but I have a feeling it is just going to turn into another Excuse for Thompson at the end of this coming season. Face it, if the team ends up under .500 again, the Thompson apologist are just going to go on and on about how the players on Defense need another year to learn the system. :roll:

[Packnut]

The Teddy debate is a mute point for now. The truth is there is more evidence and fact to support the negatives than the positives. By his own admission in today's article about the late rounds and how good he should be at uncovering gems, his track record leaves much to be desired.

I think the biggest reason for Packer fans disagreement over Teddy comes from his philosophy and that is where I have my biggest problem with him. Ted Thompson is a PASSIVE GM. Even his most ardent supporters have to agree with that.

Above all else, the man tries to play it safe. His drafts wreaks of average players. He does'nt take chances on FA's because that is an area that can kill a team if you guess wrong. It's a shame he is that way because Woodson and Pickett have to rank very high in the Packer history of great FA moves. Hell, I'd put Woodson in the top 3 of best ever, may-be even higher.

In any event, I think most agree this is a critical draft for Thompson and his future. Average will no longer get it done. He has to hit on at least 1 blue chip player and a couple of good guys. I sure hope he get's it right. We are in a division with GM's who will roll the dice and a bad draft here will have us spending the next few years looking up at the Vikes and Bears, a position that will truly SUCK!

It would be nice to someday go back to x's and o's and stop ripping each other over the value of Mr Thompson..........

[Zool]

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

[sharpe1027]

The Teddy debate is a mute point for now. The truth is there is more evidence and fact to support the negatives than the positives. By his own admission in today's article about the late rounds and how good he should be at uncovering gems, his track record leaves much to be desired.

I think the biggest reason for Packer fans disagreement over Teddy comes from his philosophy and that is where I have my biggest problem with him. Ted Thompson is a PASSIVE GM. Even his most ardent supporters have to agree with that.

Above all else, the man tries to play it safe. His drafts wreaks of average players. He does'nt take chances on FA's because that is an area that can kill a team if you guess wrong. It's a shame he is that way because Woodson and Pickett have to rank very high in the Packer history of great FA moves. Hell, I'd put Woodson in the top 3 of best ever, may-be even higher.

In any event, I think most agree this is a critical draft for Thompson and his future. Average will no longer get it done. He has to hit on at least 1 blue chip player and a couple of good guys. I sure hope he get's it right. We are in a division with GM's who will roll the dice and a bad draft here will have us spending the next few years looking up at the Vikes and Bears, a position that will truly SUCK!

It would be nice to someday go back to x's and o's and stop ripping each other over the value of Mr Thompson..........

For fucks sake get your arguments straight.

One of the biggest critisms of TT has been that he tooking a risk on an injury prone DT in the first round, at the same time he is blasted for being too safe in his picks. You take risks you get burned. Pick a side.

The other biggest critism is "lack of activity in free agency". Not a single person, not one, has bothered to compare the Packers activity in free agency over the past years to that of other teams. I call bull shit.

[K-town]

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

It's a MOO point. It's what cows think. Noone cares what a cow thinks. :)

[ThunderDan]

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

Maybe it is mute and we should all say nothing about it from now on.

[ThunderDan]

Isn't that the truth.
Drink the kool-aid and think the way we do or you will be dismissed.
Hate Favre, Sherman sucked, TT is the savior....

Way to lump everyone together under one blank statement.

I loved Favre playing for the Packers. I think the way he got out of Dodge was crap. Either way there aren't a lot of 17 year veteran QBs and we were damn close to Favre pulling the plug on himself. TT got Rodgers and after his first season as starter I'm pleased about his future.

Sherman traded up to get a punter and is already being "rumored" that football supporters at A&M want him gone.

As for TT, I think he took a cap strapped team with very little talent and turned it around pretty quickly. The next two years will determine if he really is the GM for the GB Packers. But comparing where we were under Sherman vs. where we are now I see no reason to pick the team from 4 years ago.

[RashanGary]

Nice post, TDan. Coming from someone who I thought was tough on Rodgers last year, I think it means a little more. I think it shows you call a spade a spade (as you see it anyway).

[Zool]

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

Maybe it is mute and we should all say nothing about it from now on.

That makes sense actually.

[cpk1994]

B/C we don't agree on philosophy doesn't make me any less a Packer fan... been rooting for the Packers since the 60's.

Thats how it works in these forums wist, lol....... if there is something in particular u dont care for about the Packers, chumps around here will call u less of a Packer fan.
Dont like Thompson? To these guys, that makes u less of a fan.
Dont think Rogers has shown anything special? Again, these guys will call u less of a fan.
Dont care for how Thompson is "building through the draft" (LMFAO!!!) Again, less of a fan. :roll:

you have about 20 more years of being a Packer fan under your belt than me Wist, and you have seen a lot worse from GM's than what I have seen.

Isn't that the truth.
Drink the kool-aid and think the way we do or you will be dismissed.
Hate Favre, Sherman sucked, TT is the savior....When you spew midless shit like you do, of course you will be dismissed, regardless of your opinion of TT.

[Packnut]

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

No, for fucks sake, it's spelled the way I meant it! Debating Teddy would never be a moot point because it's always an on-going topic. DUH!

However, it's should be a MUTE point as in time to hit the button and all of us, (myself included) shut the fuck up (about Teddy) and let this draft develope.

[Packnut]

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

Maybe it is mute and we should all say nothing about it from now on.

That makes sense actually.

You did get it! My apologies, I did'nt see this one. I should have known better......... :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:

[Lurker64]

Technically speaking, "moot" means "subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainly, and typically not admitting of a final decision."

So "Ted Thompson's quality as a General Manager" is at this point is, quite literally, a moot point.

It's just one of those words that's commonly used to mean the opposite of what it actually means, like "nonplussed" or "literally".

[sheepshead]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ifdqEmlx-I

[sharpe1027]

Technically speaking, "moot" means "subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainly, and typically not admitting of a final decision."

So "Ted Thompson's quality as a General Manager" is at this point is, quite literally, a moot point.

It's just one of those words that's commonly used to mean the opposite of what it actually means, like "nonplussed" or "literally".

My favorite: irregardless.

Moot is not exactly an opposite usage, more like a shift in meaning. According to google a moot point used to mean that a point is subject to debate (i.e., a moot point is a point that is hypothetical and therefore hard to prove). Now it is often used in the context of a point has no relevance, which might be true if the point was extremely hypothetical and impossible to prove. :wink:

Sorry for the "for fuck's sake" Packnut. :oops:

[Lurker64]

My favorite: irregardless.

I've tried to work "disirregardless" into my vocabulary, but I'm a pedant.

[SnakeLH2006]

My favorite: irregardless.

I've tried to work "disirregardless" into my vocabulary, but I'm a pedant.

Lurker, Snake's loves your posts of late, but what? Do you support this you sick bastard? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G95qLIWMlMk

LMAO. Just fucking with ya.

But just to stir it up some more (as this topic has been getting pretty heated so far, as it just proves we as Rats are very passionate about our Packers...that's a good thing, no?....So why not bring out the big ass spatula to stir the soup up some more? Snake loves some good ass soup. And EVERYONE has an opinion on what ingredients make a good ass soup, lol.):

:shock: :lol:


Snakey misses Shermy. :cry: Well Snake really misses winning teams and playoffs annually, actually.....

Shermy as GM: 53-27....0.06625 winning % = Average of 10.6 wins a year as GM.

TT as GM: 31-33...0.484375 winning % = Average of 7.75 wins a year as GM.

They both inherited teams coming off subpar years. Snake never meant to say Shermy was a good GM (a good coach though), but now after some years, it looks to be 3 less wins a year under TT.

:shock: :?

Snake's Take:

TT better do something good for this year with the Draft this weekend. And Snakey loves the draft...Will DVR it and pore over it like Mel Kiper's illegitimate bastard son like EVERY year. But hey. Let's just fucking win already. :x

TT better sell his goddamn soul to the Draft Nazis and go nuts to get us a STARTING OT, Raji or Brace, and/or a passrusher ala Orapoko (however you spell it) or Larry English in the 2nd to solidify the pass rush. Some of those needs (stressing NEEDS)...need to be addressed. BPA is just an excuse to keep rebuilding over and over with an expressed excuse to keep "hoping" for next year, as Snake (and I'm sure ALL Rats) only want a winner....but after 13-3 to fall back to 6-10, the same tired ass excuses need to stop. A perrenial playoff team or bust. NO MORE EXCUSES that "we are getting better......Next year.....) Fuck that noise. Getting tired of it. This is HIS (TT's) team now. TT better bring his A-game and make some big ballin' playa type moves this weekend.

Either way though, Snake is like a kid in the candy store on Draft Weekend. I love it. Okay sorry, and Snake apologizes for ranting, but this is a helluva weekend for GB. Yes? Is Snake the only one who DVR's the draft then looks up bios online to see WHO we are getting, peeping their hilites on Youtube? Sorry, kinda giddy....The Draft in Snake's opinion is one of the best Sports Weekends of the year. :) Go Pack!

[wist43]

When have the Packers ever been a "grind you down and beat you with defense" team? Early Lombardi era?

The Packers are a "shred your pass defense" team and have been for a very long time.

You can't expect them to just change their identity.

I don't mind airing it out... my advocacy of a being a power running team has to with playing the odds.

I can't recall any team with that philosophy winning a Superbowl - that didn't have a HOF QB... and what are the odds that you're going to find a Tom Brady, or a Brett Favre, or John Elway, or a Joe Montana??? Those guys don't come along every day. Even Kurt Warner is going to make the HOF.

The Packers largely wasted Favres career b/c of their indifference to defense, the Miami Dolphins completely wasted Marino's career... on the other hand, power teams like Baltimore and Pittsburgh have won SB's with slugs like Trent Dilfer and Ben Rothliesberger under center. And that list is lengthy one... Hostetler, Brad Johnson, Doug Williams, et al.

Bottom line... running a fancy pants offense like the Packers run requires a HOF calibur QB in order for them to have a legitimate shot at a SB - the QB has to carry everything, has to be everything... hard top find those guys.

As for defense, it is non-negotiable IMO... defense has to be a constant. Just b/c you run a fancy pants offense, does that mean you have to turn up a snotty nose to playing defense??? Antuan Edwards, Ahmad Carroll, Nick Barnett, AJ Hawk... not going to win anything with puke like that on your defense.

And let's be honest... Wolfe bought himself a SB, by buying himself a defense. The entire SB defensive line was bought off the FA market. Had Wolfe not done that, and we left it to GB's vaunted scouting dept, we would be stareing at over 40 years of Super Bowl futility.

I have no problem with airing it out... as long as we have the QB, but as I said, defense has to be the bedrock.

Nothing wrong with winning games 13-6... would much rather have that than losing them 51-29.

[Fritz]

One of the threads running through this thread is that the "TT lovers" will excuse another bad season, explain it away....I don't think so. Even the most ardent TT supporters, myself included, are saying that TT probably gets this year and next, and that's about it. If he doesn't have this team in the playoffs and playing well in the playoffs in 2010, he'll be gone. And if this year turns into another 6-10 with a team that is not racked by injuries, well, it might be time for him to go after one year.

So he gets two years, max, by most supporters' accounts. I do think people don't know what to make of last year, but many TT supporters hope and believe it was an aberration. I think it was an aberration. I also see TT's first year - the 4-12 - as the chickens coming home to roost from Shermy's tenure as GM. I see the 8-8 year as TT beginning to re-stock the cupboard. I see the 13-3 as a bit of an overacheiving season. I see 6-10 as a frustrating mystery, though injuries might have played a bit of a role.

I would point out that one anti-TT poster has already stated that if the Packers do well this year, it will be sheer luck. So it seems the anti-TT people are more than willing to discount any success TT might have...

Could this be TT's last year? It could. He has stood by the talent on this team - he has said he likes this team, very much. So if the team goes relatively unscathed in terms of injury, but way underperforms, then Thompson might be gone. Or he might - might - get one more year if he cans MM.

However, I don't think either of those will happen. I see good things for this season, as long as the injury bug doesn't bite too hard.

[ThunderDan]

Snakey misses Shermy. :cry: Well Snake really misses winning teams and playoffs annually, actually.....

Shermy as GM: 53-27....0.06625 winning % = Average of 10.6 wins a year as GM.

TT as GM: 31-33...0.484375 winning % = Average of 7.75 wins a year as GM.

They both inherited teams coming off subpar years. Snake never meant to say Shermy was a good GM (a good coach though), but now after some years, it looks to be 3 less wins a year under TT.

:shock: :?

The problem Snake is that you are wrong about what Sherman inherited. 3 years prior they win the SB. 2 years prior they make to the SB and lose to Denver. 1 year prior Ray Rhodes takes an incrediblely talented team and barely goes 8-8 and gets canned.

He also inherits a 3 time league MVP and HOF QB.

[sharpe1027]

One of the threads running through this thread is that the "TT lovers" will excuse another bad season, explain it away....I don't think so. Even the most ardent TT supporters, myself included, are saying that TT probably gets this year and next, and that's about it. If he doesn't have this team in the playoffs and playing well in the playoffs in 2010, he'll be gone. And if this year turns into another 6-10 with a team that is not racked by injuries, well, it might be time for him to go after one year.

So he gets two years, max, by most supporters' accounts. I do think people don't know what to make of last year, but many TT supporters hope and believe it was an aberration. I think it was an aberration. I also see TT's first year - the 4-12 - as the chickens coming home to roost from Shermy's tenure as GM. I see the 8-8 year as TT beginning to re-stock the cupboard. I see the 13-3 as a bit of an overacheiving season. I see 6-10 as a frustrating mystery, though injuries might have played a bit of a role.

I would point out that one anti-TT poster has already stated that if the Packers do well this year, it will be sheer luck. So it seems the anti-TT people are more than willing to discount any success TT might have...

Could this be TT's last year? It could. He has stood by the talent on this team - he has said he likes this team, very much. So if the team goes relatively unscathed in terms of injury, but way underperforms, then Thompson might be gone. Or he might - might - get one more year if he cans MM.

However, I don't think either of those will happen. I see good things for this season, as long as the injury bug doesn't bite too hard.

I couldn't agree more. I've said it before, if the Packers aren't in playoffs this year, I will be fine with getting rid of TT. Til then, it is a whole lot of hot air. He's not going anywhere this year. End of story.

[Waldo]

When have the Packers ever been a "grind you down and beat you with defense" team? Early Lombardi era?

The Packers are a "shred your pass defense" team and have been for a very long time.

You can't expect them to just change their identity.

I don't mind airing it out... my advocacy of a being a power running team has to with playing the odds.

I can't recall any team with that philosophy winning a Superbowl - that didn't have a HOF QB... and what are the odds that you're going to find a Tom Brady, or a Brett Favre, or John Elway, or a Joe Montana??? Those guys don't come along every day. Even Kurt Warner is going to make the HOF.

The Packers largely wasted Favres career b/c of their indifference to defense, the Miami Dolphins completely wasted Marino's career... on the other hand, power teams like Baltimore and Pittsburgh have won SB's with slugs like Trent Dilfer and Ben Rothliesberger under center. And that list is lengthy one... Hostetler, Brad Johnson, Doug Williams, et al.

Bottom line... running a fancy pants offense like the Packers run requires a HOF calibur QB in order for them to have a legitimate shot at a SB - the QB has to carry everything, has to be everything... hard top find those guys.

As for defense, it is non-negotiable IMO... defense has to be a constant. Just b/c you run a fancy pants offense, does that mean you have to turn up a snotty nose to playing defense??? Antuan Edwards, Ahmad Carroll, Nick Barnett, AJ Hawk... not going to win anything with puke like that on your defense.

And let's be honest... Wolfe bought himself a SB, by buying himself a defense. The entire SB defensive line was bought off the FA market. Had Wolfe not done that, and we left it to GB's vaunted scouting dept, we would be stareing at over 40 years of Super Bowl futility.

I have no problem with airing it out... as long as we have the QB, but as I said, defense has to be the bedrock.

Nothing wrong with winning games 13-6... would much rather have that than losing them 51-29.

I guess we do both agree on one thing. While the underlying methodology may be different, we need to do a better job running the ball. We need to be able to effectively run into 8 in the box. That is how you control games. It is absolutely a lost cause right now.

[wist43]

When have the Packers ever been a "grind you down and beat you with defense" team? Early Lombardi era?

The Packers are a "shred your pass defense" team and have been for a very long time.

You can't expect them to just change their identity.

I don't mind airing it out... my advocacy of a being a power running team has to with playing the odds.

I can't recall any team with that philosophy winning a Superbowl - that didn't have a HOF QB... and what are the odds that you're going to find a Tom Brady, or a Brett Favre, or John Elway, or a Joe Montana??? Those guys don't come along every day. Even Kurt Warner is going to make the HOF.

The Packers largely wasted Favres career b/c of their indifference to defense, the Miami Dolphins completely wasted Marino's career... on the other hand, power teams like Baltimore and Pittsburgh have won SB's with slugs like Trent Dilfer and Ben Rothliesberger under center. And that list is lengthy one... Hostetler, Brad Johnson, Doug Williams, et al.

Bottom line... running a fancy pants offense like the Packers run requires a HOF calibur QB in order for them to have a legitimate shot at a SB - the QB has to carry everything, has to be everything... hard top find those guys.

As for defense, it is non-negotiable IMO... defense has to be a constant. Just b/c you run a fancy pants offense, does that mean you have to turn up a snotty nose to playing defense??? Antuan Edwards, Ahmad Carroll, Nick Barnett, AJ Hawk... not going to win anything with puke like that on your defense.

And let's be honest... Wolfe bought himself a SB, by buying himself a defense. The entire SB defensive line was bought off the FA market. Had Wolfe not done that, and we left it to GB's vaunted scouting dept, we would be stareing at over 40 years of Super Bowl futility.

I have no problem with airing it out... as long as we have the QB, but as I said, defense has to be the bedrock.

Nothing wrong with winning games 13-6... would much rather have that than losing them 51-29.

I guess we do both agree on one thing. While the underlying methodology may be different, we need to do a better job running the ball. We need to be able to effectively run into 8 in the box. That is how you control games. It is absolutely a lost cause right now.

No argument here...

[wist43]

One of the threads running through this thread is that the "TT lovers" will excuse another bad season, explain it away....I don't think so. Even the most ardent TT supporters, myself included, are saying that TT probably gets this year and next, and that's about it. If he doesn't have this team in the playoffs and playing well in the playoffs in 2010, he'll be gone. And if this year turns into another 6-10 with a team that is not racked by injuries, well, it might be time for him to go after one year.

So he gets two years, max, by most supporters' accounts. I do think people don't know what to make of last year, but many TT supporters hope and believe it was an aberration. I think it was an aberration. I also see TT's first year - the 4-12 - as the chickens coming home to roost from Shermy's tenure as GM. I see the 8-8 year as TT beginning to re-stock the cupboard. I see the 13-3 as a bit of an overacheiving season. I see 6-10 as a frustrating mystery, though injuries might have played a bit of a role.

I would point out that one anti-TT poster has already stated that if the Packers do well this year, it will be sheer luck. So it seems the anti-TT people are more than willing to discount any success TT might have...

Could this be TT's last year? It could. He has stood by the talent on this team - he has said he likes this team, very much. So if the team goes relatively unscathed in terms of injury, but way underperforms, then Thompson might be gone. Or he might - might - get one more year if he cans MM.

However, I don't think either of those will happen. I see good things for this season, as long as the injury bug doesn't bite too hard.

I couldn't agree more. I've said it before, if the Packers aren't in playoffs this year, I will be fine with getting rid of TT. Til then, it is a whole lot of hot air. He's not going anywhere this year. End of story.

TT's not going anywhere, regardless of record... his slow and steady approach will play well with Murhpy and the board; and, none of them cares much about Packer Nation - we'll keep buying tickets and gear.

[PackerBlues]

TT's not going anywhere, regardless of record... his slow and steady approach will play well with Murhpy and the board; and, none of them cares much about Packer Nation - we'll keep buying tickets and gear.

Good Point.......but after reading the rest of the posts prior to this one, I'm confused. Is it a moot point? A mute point? Irregardless of being moot can it still be mute?..... regardless of the fact that irregardless is not a word (apparently)??

:laugh: Disirregardless???

[sharpe1027]

TT's not going anywhere, regardless of record... his slow and steady approach will play well with Murhpy and the board; and, none of them cares much about Packer Nation - we'll keep buying tickets and gear.

Good Point.......but after reading the rest of the posts prior to this one, I'm confused. Is it a moot point? A mute point? Irregardless of being moot can it still be mute?..... regardless of the fact that irregardless is not a word (apparently)??

:laugh: Disirregardless???

Unregardless of the disirregardlessness of the muted moot point, I hear a violin playing when I read Wist's post above. Poor fans, nobody cares about us.

I am sure that Murphy has no interest in a superbowl since he is only interested in the bottom line. The Packer's clearly make the same amount of money disirregardless of their W/L record. Why on Earth would he want to win a SB? I guess if Wist is right, then the only way to win a SB is to become like the Vikings fans and trash talk our team while we stop buying tickets and we wallow in our self-pity. It is a moot point for us to discuss this because as far as Murphy is concerned all fans are mute. I therefore conclude that the only true Packer fans are those that boycott the Packers unless they are wining. :lol:

[Fritz]

One of the threads running through this thread is that the "TT lovers" will excuse another bad season, explain it away....I don't think so. Even the most ardent TT supporters, myself included, are saying that TT probably gets this year and next, and that's about it. If he doesn't have this team in the playoffs and playing well in the playoffs in 2010, he'll be gone. And if this year turns into another 6-10 with a team that is not racked by injuries, well, it might be time for him to go after one year.

So he gets two years, max, by most supporters' accounts. I do think people don't know what to make of last year, but many TT supporters hope and believe it was an aberration. I think it was an aberration. I also see TT's first year - the 4-12 - as the chickens coming home to roost from Shermy's tenure as GM. I see the 8-8 year as TT beginning to re-stock the cupboard. I see the 13-3 as a bit of an overacheiving season. I see 6-10 as a frustrating mystery, though injuries might have played a bit of a role.

I would point out that one anti-TT poster has already stated that if the Packers do well this year, it will be sheer luck. So it seems the anti-TT people are more than willing to discount any success TT might have...

Could this be TT's last year? It could. He has stood by the talent on this team - he has said he likes this team, very much. So if the team goes relatively unscathed in terms of injury, but way underperforms, then Thompson might be gone. Or he might - might - get one more year if he cans MM.

However, I don't think either of those will happen. I see good things for this season, as long as the injury bug doesn't bite too hard.

I couldn't agree more. I've said it before, if the Packers aren't in playoffs this year, I will be fine with getting rid of TT. Til then, it is a whole lot of hot air. He's not going anywhere this year. End of story.

TT's not going anywhere, regardless of record... his slow and steady approach will play well with Murhpy and the board; and, none of them cares much about Packer Nation - we'll keep buying tickets and gear.

Wist, I like ya and all, but sometimes you write things that make no sense at all. The italicized line above is one of those things. Please. This ain't Detroit. If TT doesn't have a winning record in the next two years, don't tell me he won't get canned. And don't tell me Murphy doesn't care about winning a SB as long as the team makes money. Come on.

[RashanGary]

Not only that, Fritz, but the majority of fans support the direction that Thompson has this team. It's the vocal minority that hate him.

[Partial]

The direction that Thompson has this team? Wake up dude, the team is basically the same if not worse than when he got here. I like his approach and think that if he starts drafting better the team could be very good, but facts are facts.

I really don't see the super positive direction that you do. I see a team full of ups and downs. Very young and very inconsistent.

[Zool]

Well which is it? Is the team the same as when he got here, or is it an up and down young team? He inherited a pretty old team.

[Fritz]

What Zool said.

[wist43]

I think there's a decent chance the Packers will be above .500 in the next few years... I'm not saying they'll be a sub .500 team.

But I think our goals are different... I want to win SB's. You guys seem happy just to be plodding along... 10-6 in perpituity is fine with you guys - not so with me.

[mraynrand]

The direction that Thompson has this team? Wake up dude, the team is basically the same if not worse than when he got here. .

I think your brain power is running a bit low. Time to wake up the hamster!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01240/hamster_1240313c.jpg

[Zool]

I don't recall any single person here saying they would be okay with perpetual 10-6. I totally get what you're saying about the D though. I don't think the D will dominate this year but if they can draft well a top 10 D will go a long ways towards the SB plans.

[Gunakor]

Wake up dude, the team is basically the same if not worse than when he got here.

Really? Explain what you mean. TT year 1 = 4-12 with Brett Favre starting 16 games at QB. TT year 4 = 6-10 with Aaron Rodgers starting 16 games at QB. IMO the team is not basically the same OR worse than it was when he got here.

[cheesner]

Wake up dude, the team is basically the same if not worse than when he got here.

Really? Explain what you mean. TT year 1 = 4-12 with Brett Favre starting 16 games at QB. TT year 4 = 6-10 with Aaron Rodgers starting 16 games at QB. IMO the team is not basically the same OR worse than it was when he got here.


1. 4-12
2. 8-8
3. 12-4
4. 6-10

To me there is a definate trend here and it is up. The last season is one of those, what you call, statistical outliers.

The crux of the argument is was last year an aberration or was the trend from the first 3 years the aberration or an illusion?

To know for sure will just take some time to see. To determine the likely answer, you need to look at the roster and ask yourself, 'Is there more talent here than when TT started?' I am not sure how you can look at the roster of 5 years ago and say there was more talent. Top to bottom at nearly all positions, the current roster is significantly more talented than the team that TT started with.

I for one, am looking forward to some great seasons for the Packers coming up. As long as TT continues along with his plan, the Packers are in great hands.

[TheCheese]

Wake up dude, the team is basically the same if not worse than when he got here.

Really? Explain what you mean. TT year 1 = 4-12 with Brett Favre starting 16 games at QB. TT year 4 = 6-10 with Aaron Rodgers starting 16 games at QB. IMO the team is not basically the same OR worse than it was when he got here.


1. 4-12
2. 8-8
3. 12-4
4. 6-10

To me there is a definate trend here and it is up. The last season is one of those, what you call, statistical outliers.

The crux of the argument is was last year an aberration or was the trend from the first 3 years the aberration or an illusion?

To know for sure will just take some time to see. To determine the likely answer, you need to look at the roster and ask yourself, 'Is there more talent here than when TT started?' I am not sure how you can look at the roster of 5 years ago and say there was more talent. Top to bottom at nearly all positions, the current roster is significantly more talented than the team that TT started with.

I for one, am looking forward to some great seasons for the Packers coming up. As long as TT continues along with his plan, the Packers are in great hands.

Year 3 is actually 13-3

[Partial]

Wake up dude, the team is basically the same if not worse than when he got here.

Really? Explain what you mean. TT year 1 = 4-12 with Brett Favre starting 16 games at QB. TT year 4 = 6-10 with Aaron Rodgers starting 16 games at QB. IMO the team is not basically the same OR worse than it was when he got here.

6-10 is still awful dude. Teets barely has a winning record. I like the way he approaches things, but I don't think this team is any better now than when he got here. It's younger, sure, but better? I don't know about that, and the record since he's been here basically backs up the claim.

I'm very surprised so many people jumped on my comment. I don't understand it. Where is the positive direction? We didn't end the year with any positive momentum at all, so I'm not sure where this positive up swing is coming from.

I know its the popular thing to jump on Partial's posts and call him dumb because that is what the cool kids do... but I have yet to see anyone post a bit of contrary evidence while calling me dumb. So, if you're going to be a big man, at least provide some evidence of this upswing.

And saying well, we have up and comers like Jennings(love him as a player, not knocking him at all) on the roster now that we didn't have before... Big whoop. We had up and comers like Driver and Walker before he took over.

I see the talent level as largely the same as we have the same # of blue and red chippers now as we did in 2004. In 2004, we had Favre as a Blue chipper, and Clifton, Green, Walker as Red Chippers. In 2009, we have Jennings as the lone Blue chipper, and Kampman, Woodson, and Collins as the red chippers. That's why we're not a dramatically better or worse team, because we have largely the same amount of excellent players.

The way that I see it is, is we have a good amount of young depth now that we didn't have before. We had a bunch of old depth before. I don't think either group is any more or less talented than the other.

After watching this season, it's pretty clear to me that the anomaly is 2007, and that Teets' average record for the other 3 seasons is 6-10. Recall that in 2006, we went into week 13 with a 4-12 record, and we really happened to get hot at the end, which carried over into the hot start of 2007. It's not like we were consistently good in 2006.

[Gunakor]

Wake up dude, the team is basically the same if not worse than when he got here.

Really? Explain what you mean. TT year 1 = 4-12 with Brett Favre starting 16 games at QB. TT year 4 = 6-10 with Aaron Rodgers starting 16 games at QB. IMO the team is not basically the same OR worse than it was when he got here.

6-10 is still awful dude. Teets barely has a winning record. I like the way he approaches things, but I don't think this team is any better now than when he got here. It's younger, sure, but better? I don't know about that, and the record since he's been here basically backs up the claim.

I'm very surprised so many people jumped on my comment. I don't understand it. Where is the positive direction? We didn't end the year with any positive momentum at all, so I'm not sure where this positive up swing is coming from.

I know its the popular thing to jump on Partial's posts and call him dumb because that is what the cool kids do... but I have yet to see anyone post a bit of contrary evidence while calling me dumb. So, if you're going to be a big man, at least provide some evidence of this upswing.

And saying well, we have up and comers like Jennings(love him as a player, not knocking him at all) on the roster now that we didn't have before... Big whoop. We had up and comers like Driver and Walker before he took over.

The way that I see it is, is we have a good amount of young depth now that we didn't have before. We had a bunch of old depth before. I don't think either group is any more or less talented than the other.

After watching this season, it's pretty clear to me that the anomaly is 2007, and that Teets' average record for the other 3 seasons is 6-10. Most statistical methods of analyzing data would point to 2007 being the anomaly as well.

If the talent is the same but the team is younger, that means the team is better. The old team TT was left with had maxed out their potential. The young team TT brought in only has room to keep improving.

You are right, we didn't end the year with any positive momentum. Just a win against the lowly Lions. Good thing that season ended. Our guys will get healthy and get back at it. Why are you so certain that the momentum from last December is going to carry over into this coming September?

Years 1 and 4 were in fact anomolies. The reason those are anomalies is that both seasons were wrought with injury. More players at more key positions were put on IR than most other teams in teh NFL in both seasons. 2005 was without a doubt the worst season in terms of injuries I can remember in a long time - we were down to our fifth RB to start the last game, and you remember who the WR's were to end that season. Last year I think only the Seahawks were bit worse by the injury bug than we were. And look where they're picking tomorrow.

2007 wasn't the norm by any means either, in fact I have said so numerous times that we were just a 10 win team that year who stole 3 wins on sheer luck. I still think this is a 10 win team.

[Partial]

I don't think that younger necessarily means the team is better off. I think it means just that, that they're a younger team. This could pay dividends in the form of them staying healthier, having faster recovery, etc. I'm not sure how much that matters or means to a pro team.

I'm not sure how I feel about the injuries last year because I feel that a lot of them seemed to occur to back-ups. When Al went down, Tramon stepped in and we didn't really miss a beat. When Jenkins went down, that hurt, but he was largely ineffective the previous year according to coaches due to injury, so I'm not sure how much of an impact that had. Losing Barnett hurt, no doubt. You can't just plug someone else into the vocal leader of the defenses spot, and the only "tough, nasty guy" we have, and expect to not skip a beat.

I guess at some point you have to wonder if having Tramon at the starting corner ultimately made a big difference to the way teams played their third receiver, etc. I'd venture a guess they did take advantage of the matchup more often when a less qualified defender was covering, but I don't have an accurate answer to this.

[SnakeLH2006]

I don't think that younger necessarily means the team is better off. I think it means just that, that they're a younger team. This could pay dividends in the form of them staying healthier, having faster recovery, etc. I'm not sure how much that matters or means to a pro team.

I'm not sure how I feel about the injuries last year because I feel that a lot of them seemed to occur to back-ups. When Al went down, Tramon stepped in and we didn't really miss a beat. When Jenkins went down, that hurt, but he was largely ineffective the previous year according to coaches due to injury, so I'm not sure how much of an impact that had. Losing Barnett hurt, no doubt. You can't just plug someone else into the vocal leader of the defenses spot, and the only "tough, nasty guy" we have, and expect to not skip a beat.

I guess at some point you have to wonder if having Tramon at the starting corner ultimately made a big difference to the way teams played their third receiver, etc. I'd venture a guess they did take advantage of the matchup more often when a less qualified defender was covering, but I don't have an accurate answer to this.

Wow...Partial...Snake agrees overall with this post. Fuck injuries. They happen to all teams. We in 2008 were not much different than most. Sick of excuses. Big draft. Many say fuck if we are gonna get a starter....that's ok, but TT better hope we go 10-6 at least. Bottom line= wins equal GM status. Let's see it yo. Snake gets sick having a dream we go 6-10 again.

[Gunakor]

I don't think that younger necessarily means the team is better off. I think it means just that, that they're a younger team. This could pay dividends in the form of them staying healthier, having faster recovery, etc. I'm not sure how much that matters or means to a pro team.

I'm not sure how I feel about the injuries last year because I feel that a lot of them seemed to occur to back-ups. When Al went down, Tramon stepped in and we didn't really miss a beat. When Jenkins went down, that hurt, but he was largely ineffective the previous year according to coaches due to injury, so I'm not sure how much of an impact that had. Losing Barnett hurt, no doubt. You can't just plug someone else into the vocal leader of the defenses spot, and the only "tough, nasty guy" we have, and expect to not skip a beat.

I guess at some point you have to wonder if having Tramon at the starting corner ultimately made a big difference to the way teams played their third receiver, etc. I'd venture a guess they did take advantage of the matchup more often when a less qualified defender was covering, but I don't have an accurate answer to this.

Well, especially concerning the Jenkins injury last year, he finished the season in the top 5 on the team in sacks - having only played a couple games. I think it made a huge impact, considering there was nobody else on the roster who could get pressure opposite Kampman all season long.

One can't downplay the nagging injury to KGB either. In 2007 he gave us 9 and a half sacks, in 2008 he completely disappeared. Again, no pressure opposite Kampman.

Injuries to backups: You are right, but backups don't get injured when the starters are in the game. Rouse doesn't get injured if Collins and Bigby are healthy, for example. Now we are down to Charlie Peprah at safety - how many games do you expect to win? This reminds me of Noah Herron going in for an injured Samkon Gado, who went in for an injured Tony Fisher, who went in for an injured Najeh Davenport, who went in for an injured Ahman Green. It makes my head spin!

[wist43]

I don't think that younger necessarily means the team is better off. I think it means just that, that they're a younger team. This could pay dividends in the form of them staying healthier, having faster recovery, etc. I'm not sure how much that matters or means to a pro team.

I'm not sure how I feel about the injuries last year because I feel that a lot of them seemed to occur to back-ups. When Al went down, Tramon stepped in and we didn't really miss a beat. When Jenkins went down, that hurt, but he was largely ineffective the previous year according to coaches due to injury, so I'm not sure how much of an impact that had. Losing Barnett hurt, no doubt. You can't just plug someone else into the vocal leader of the defenses spot, and the only "tough, nasty guy" we have, and expect to not skip a beat.

I guess at some point you have to wonder if having Tramon at the starting corner ultimately made a big difference to the way teams played their third receiver, etc. I'd venture a guess they did take advantage of the matchup more often when a less qualified defender was covering, but I don't have an accurate answer to this.

Well, especially concerning the Jenkins injury last year, he finished the season in the top 5 on the team in sacks - having only played a couple games. I think it made a huge impact, considering there was nobody else on the roster who could get pressure opposite Kampman all season long.

One can't downplay the nagging injury to KGB either. In 2007 he gave us 9 and a half sacks, in 2008 he completely disappeared. Again, no pressure opposite Kampman.

Injuries to backups: You are right, but backups don't get injured when the starters are in the game. Rouse doesn't get injured if Collins and Bigby are healthy, for example. Now we are down to Charlie Peprah at safety - how many games do you expect to win? This reminds me of Noah Herron going in for an injured Samkon Gado, who went in for an injured Tony Fisher, who went in for an injured Najeh Davenport, who went in for an injured Ahman Green. It makes my head spin!

Your Jenkins comment... doesn't that tell you that we have exactly zero pass rushers from the LB position??? What did we produce as a team??? 28 sacks, I think??? And yet, all of you TT guys are saying we have everything we need on defense to transition to a 3-4??? Nick Barnett couldn't rush a Wal-Mart on the day after T-Giving.

Beyond that... TT maintains that all we need is better depth - not sure what his exact quote was, but the gist of it was that he isn't looking for any starters out of this draft... so, in his mind, we are Superbowl ready with our current starting roster??? Do you, and the other cheereleaders in here really believe that???

As I've said, I think we have different goals... if TT thinks his starting roster is set, then I can only conclude that his goal is to field a decent team, w/o much care for winning a Superbowl - b/c, quite frankly, I don't think anyone can look at the roster as it is currently configured and think we're a legitimate Superbowl contender.

All we need is depth??? That's nuts, yet that is TT's line... does that mean that he will bypass a guy at 9 that would beat out one of his beloved, in favor of a guy that has to be developed, but will offer no immediate impact???

Beginning to think the guy might have a screw loose.

[Fritz]

What if? What if, though, TT really likes...Sanchez?? And he's sitting there at #9?

Me, I say no - Rogers is too young to take Sanchez. Even if you develop Sanchez, you're not going to get more than that #9 pick you took him at. And if he's insurance in case Rogers gets hurt, that's too expensive for insurance.

Just a thought. We've "what-iffed" so many scenarios, I thought I'd toss this one out there.

If you are Thompson and your really, really think Crabtree is HOF material, why on earth would you draft an okay guy at some other position instead?

[Gunakor]

Your Jenkins comment... doesn't that tell you that we have exactly zero pass rushers from the LB position??? What did we produce as a team??? 28 sacks, I think??? And yet, all of you TT guys are saying we have everything we need on defense to transition to a 3-4??? Nick Barnett couldn't rush a Wal-Mart on the day after T-Giving.

Beyond that... TT maintains that all we need is better depth - not sure what his exact quote was, but the gist of it was that he isn't looking for any starters out of this draft... so, in his mind, we are Superbowl ready with our current starting roster??? Do you, and the other cheereleaders in here really believe that???

As I've said, I think we have different goals... if TT thinks his starting roster is set, then I can only conclude that his goal is to field a decent team, w/o much care for winning a Superbowl - b/c, quite frankly, I don't think anyone can look at the roster as it is currently configured and think we're a legitimate Superbowl contender.

All we need is depth??? That's nuts, yet that is TT's line... does that mean that he will bypass a guy at 9 that would beat out one of his beloved, in favor of a guy that has to be developed, but will offer no immediate impact???

Beginning to think the guy might have a screw loose.

Jenkins comment: Jenkins is not a LB, first of all. And on top of that, none of our LB's were asked to rush very often last season. The only LB in this year's 3-4 alignment that was asked to rush the passer last season is Aaron Kampman. He'll get plenty of sacks and pressures from the OLB position this year.

Super Bowl ready: Maybe not this year, but the team is young and improving. Just because this roster might not win a Super Bowl this year doesn't mean it's not the roster that can win one next year or the year after that. Or, maybe it's the same team that was a play away from a Super Bowl a couple years ago - maybe they really are Super Bowl ready.

Immediate impact: I addressed this in another thread too. I don't expect rookies to make immediate impacts. In fact, I'd prefer to sit them for a year to get up to NFL speed. Do you not realize just how few rookies are NFL ready when drafted? If you are lucky enough to get a rookie that makes an immediate impact, that's a bonus. But it shouldn't be an expectation. Here's a better expectation for you, one that is far less likely to disappoint you - the majority of our starters from last season should be expected to continue to improve, making this a better quality team overall with or without an impact rookie.

[SnakeLH2006]

Your Jenkins comment... doesn't that tell you that we have exactly zero pass rushers from the LB position??? What did we produce as a team??? 28 sacks, I think??? And yet, all of you TT guys are saying we have everything we need on defense to transition to a 3-4??? Nick Barnett couldn't rush a Wal-Mart on the day after T-Giving.

Beyond that... TT maintains that all we need is better depth - not sure what his exact quote was, but the gist of it was that he isn't looking for any starters out of this draft... so, in his mind, we are Superbowl ready with our current starting roster??? Do you, and the other cheereleaders in here really believe that???

As I've said, I think we have different goals... if TT thinks his starting roster is set, then I can only conclude that his goal is to field a decent team, w/o much care for winning a Superbowl - b/c, quite frankly, I don't think anyone can look at the roster as it is currently configured and think we're a legitimate Superbowl contender.

All we need is depth??? That's nuts, yet that is TT's line... does that mean that he will bypass a guy at 9 that would beat out one of his beloved, in favor of a guy that has to be developed, but will offer no immediate impact???

Beginning to think the guy might have a screw loose.

Jenkins comment: Jenkins is not a LB, first of all. And on top of that, none of our LB's were asked to rush very often last season. The only LB in this year's 3-4 alignment that was asked to rush the passer last season is Aaron Kampman. He'll get plenty of sacks and pressures from the OLB position this year.

Super Bowl ready: Maybe not this year, but the team is young and improving. Just because this roster might not win a Super Bowl this year doesn't mean it's not the roster that can win one next year or the year after that. Or, maybe it's the same team that was a play away from a Super Bowl a couple years ago - maybe they really are Super Bowl ready.

Immediate impact: I addressed this in another thread too. I don't expect rookies to make immediate impacts. In fact, I'd prefer to sit them for a year to get up to NFL speed. Do you not realize just how few rookies are NFL ready when drafted? If you are lucky enough to get a rookie that makes an immediate impact, that's a bonus. But it shouldn't be an expectation. Here's a better expectation for you, one that is far less likely to disappoint you - the majority of our starters from last season should be expected to continue to improve, making this a better quality team overall with or without an impact rookie.

Snake hates to piss on a parade, but FUCK YEAAHAHHAHAHAHHH!!!!!! My initial post that started this huge ass thread is vindicated. We got not one, but two guys that will most likely start and produce THIS YEAR!! FUCK YEAHH!!!! Snake is pretty damn happy. It isn't like we could fill EVERY hole this year with the draft (OT looks shaky)...but getting BJ (did not Snake preach n' predict that) to be a big ass Warren Sapp is HUGE! Scouts have been saying he's prob. the best pass-rushing NT in the league RIGHT NOW...and a beast to boot in the run. That was just awesome.

Clay Matthews, pretty good deal. Overall...just gave up a 3rd in retrospect (yes GB gave up a 2nd, 2 3rds, for the 1st and a 5th....so in essence it's like giving up 1 3rd and filler)...If they reallly like him (as Snake did...what awesome bloodlines too...) sobeit.

Both guys start immediately (BJ goes to NT and Pickett will be a DE...TT made reference to the fact that Pickett can play End in the JSO blogs). Matthews will most likely supplant Poops as the other OLB, unless he fails in camp.

Snake is quite happy we got not one but 2 likely starters in our front D 7, which WAS a big weakness.

Crabby might be great, but thank god TT reads PackerRats and avoided the Curse of Bretsky and took Snake's Take to heart. The curse is broken unless BJ becomes the Curse of Snake. :shock:

BTW, Snake is really Ted Thompson, General Manager of the Green Bay Packers...I was just testing you all, and thanks for the great insight on getting 2 starters with my draft, instead of hoarding picks. Crabby will be a Sterling Sharpe if SF ever gets a QB, but we felt everyone would love a BJ, and Ted likes a good BJ too, obviously. With our second pick in the first, Clay was too hard to pass up. We are now happy with our 3-4 for next year as we are much improved. Pickett will be our DE. Our LB's are nuts and BJ is a beast out the gate. And oh yea, Mission, don't be trying to get Raji to smoke with ya at our training camp in GB this summer. Thanks. Love Ted.

[Bretsky]

Good Shit here Snake

I'm down with Raji; if the SuperStar was not there he'd have been my bias.
I think TT crapped in his pants when he saw both Raji and Crab there.

The curse of Bretsky is gone; Crabby will be a star ! You will all see !

Although, the dude did go to about the worst spot possible; I don't even know who the QB will be in San Francisco

[Bretsky]

Crabby might be great, but thank god TT reads PackerRats and avoided the Curse of Bretsky and took Snake's Take to heart. The curse is broken unless BJ becomes the Curse of Snake.

BTW, Snake is really Ted Thompson, General Manager of the Green Bay Packers...I was just testing you all, and thanks for the great insight on getting 2 starters with my draft, instead of hoarding picks. Crabby will be a Sterling Sharpe if SF ever gets a QB, but we felt everyone would love a BJ, and Ted likes a good BJ too



This stuff was priceless :!: :bclap:

[SnakeLH2006]

Crabby might be great, but thank god TT reads PackerRats and avoided the Curse of Bretsky and took Snake's Take to heart. The curse is broken unless BJ becomes the Curse of Snake.

BTW, Snake is really Ted Thompson, General Manager of the Green Bay Packers...I was just testing you all, and thanks for the great insight on getting 2 starters with my draft, instead of hoarding picks. Crabby will be a Sterling Sharpe if SF ever gets a QB, but we felt everyone would love a BJ, and Ted likes a good BJ too

This stuff was priceless :!: :bclap:

True dat (I'm trying to sound hip). But Snake....err..Big Time Ted (that's what I make all my scouts call me) loves our picks. We get two starters to boost our 3-4. I hope JH will pan out, or Jolly is eligible to play out the gate, but with Pickett at DE (perfect for our new 3-4 scheme) we can only hope that I don't have to play Montgomery at DE unless it's a blowout. :shock: Ted apologizes for that as he's as much a fan as all you Rats and DVR's the games so he can see what the announcers say. Teddy was wasted and texted "Get him, instead of Forget him" when the cap guys wanted to know what to do when Mont's agent called saying he might get an offer from the Lions as a waterboy. Ted is sorry about that. Yeah he sucks. My bad.

You Rats, love you guys, are the best Packer website forum anywhere with insight on what to do on draft day. You guys thought I (Big Time Ted) was incapable of filling needs in this weak ass draft, yet I gave us 2 starters for our 3-4 out the gate.

I'll admit I was trying to bring up our core with trading down in previous drafts, but after going 6-10, we needed a beast in the middle at NT to combat the AP's and Forte's in our division...Not only that, but if Mission doesn't get BJ high :lol: in training camp, we might have the best inside-outside NG in the league next year. Dude's a beast yo. Kicked my ass in Yahtzee the other nite. Nice guy though.

Clay was on my (Big Time Ted's) board as a top 15 pick. But I knew so many of you Rats, and love ya all, but I'm scared of that one guy that hates ARod, boy is he stupid sometimes (but passionate as we all love our Green Bay Packers...no?)...so I let it slide.

Clay will step in as I fucked up giving Poops a big contract. Big Time Ted admits Poppinga sucks, but damn if that guy isn't the life of the party on naked Twister night. :) Clay will be a beast, and hopefully Nick is done with the drunken fatties on the weekends and actually comes back at least as solid as he'd been the past 2 seasons after his knee injury. If so, name a 3-4 with better LB's with Clay, AJ, Nick, and Kampy manning those spots in the NFL? Can't do it cuz BTT (Big Time Ted) just hooked ya up...And Ted is SCOTCHED up. Yah! What a great day...no?

We'll look at CB's next year, and maybe OT's tomorrow with our 4th, but our secondary is proven to beast it. They are old, but I already gave Al money, so the fuck if Collins thinks he's getting paid till I see what he does in our new 3-4. I consider Wonderlics in my contracts extensions. Clay got a 34 and BJ a 21...What, yep, but damn if that kid can't rape me in Yahtzee. That was the kicker in him vs. Crabtee, but alas, we need to beast in the 3-4. Dom is the man.

Just thought I'd share some thoughts..you guys are great, and glad to see so many happy on here for once on PackerRats on draft day. BTW, Teddy loved seeing Paco rip me on here, made my late nite hooker runs seem legit if he hated me that much. Mad, why did you ban him? What would Paco say today? HAHAHA. Prob. not much. Brett who? AHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Love, TT (aka Big Time Ted....I hate that TT moniker) :cry:

TT is gonna get wasted tonite and leaves the drafting to Mike McCarthy in the morning as he's an Offensive Cood. to heart. Gotta give him something, lol, as he's wondering what's up with the OT's.

Time to celebrate like a true player. Peep this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbwcU2YbBRI

Scotch and hookers for Snake...err......Big Time Ted tonite. Time to celebrate. Ted just gave us our division next year. SuperBowl who? If those JAGs from Arizona can do it.....??? Ted just proved our team is stacked after today...BTW, Mission what's your phone number? Teddy is wasted. :lol: :shock: 8-)

[KYPack]

Lemme get this straight....

When Snake talks in the first person, he is really talking about somebody else?

[wist43]

Lemme get this straight....

When Snake talks in the first person, he is really talking about somebody else?

Trying to figure out who, or which, voice Snake is in can only lead to psychological problems/heavy drinking.

As a Libertarian, my preference would be light one up... but, the Victorian Nazi's that make up my fellow citizenry would send me for reeducation :D

[Fritz]

Lemme get this straight....

When Snake talks in the first person, he is really talking about somebody else?

Trying to figure out who, or which, voice Snake is in can only lead to psychological problems/heavy drinking.

As a Libertarian, my preference would be light one up... but, the Victorian Nazi's that make up my fellow citizenry would send me for reeducation :D

Oh...now I get you, Wist...you're Eeyore like because when you huff you get paranoid!

[wist43]

Lemme get this straight....

When Snake talks in the first person, he is really talking about somebody else?

Trying to figure out who, or which, voice Snake is in can only lead to psychological problems/heavy drinking.

As a Libertarian, my preference would be light one up... but, the Victorian Nazi's that make up my fellow citizenry would send me for reeducation :D

Oh...now I get you, Wist...you're Eeyore like because when you huff you get paranoid!

That's just it man... can't smoke, so I'm cranky all the time :lol:

Don't like to drink much... but society says that's how I'm supposed to "medicate"... I'm a man without a country my friend :)

[Bretsky]

Crabby might be great, but thank god TT reads PackerRats and avoided the Curse of Bretsky and took Snake's Take to heart. The curse is broken unless BJ becomes the Curse of Snake.

BTW, Snake is really Ted Thompson, General Manager of the Green Bay Packers...I was just testing you all, and thanks for the great insight on getting 2 starters with my draft, instead of hoarding picks. Crabby will be a Sterling Sharpe if SF ever gets a QB, but we felt everyone would love a BJ, and Ted likes a good BJ too

This stuff was priceless :!: :bclap:

TT is gonna get wasted tonite and leaves the drafting to Mike McCarthy in the morning as he's an Offensive Cood. to heart. Gotta give him something, lol, as he's wondering what's up with the OT's.
Time to celebrate like a true player. Peep this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbwcU2YbBRI

Scotch and hookers for Snake...err......Big Time Ted tonite. Time to celebrate. Ted just gave us our division next year. SuperBowl who? If those JAGs from Arizona can do it.....??? Ted just proved our team is stacked after today...BTW, Mission what's your phone number? Teddy is wasted. :lol: :shock: 8-)



Sounds like MM got his OT per da Snake

[Gunakor]

Crabby might be great, but thank god TT reads PackerRats and avoided the Curse of Bretsky and took Snake's Take to heart. The curse is broken unless BJ becomes the Curse of Snake.

BTW, Snake is really Ted Thompson, General Manager of the Green Bay Packers...I was just testing you all, and thanks for the great insight on getting 2 starters with my draft, instead of hoarding picks. Crabby will be a Sterling Sharpe if SF ever gets a QB, but we felt everyone would love a BJ, and Ted likes a good BJ too

This stuff was priceless :!: :bclap:

TT is gonna get wasted tonite and leaves the drafting to Mike McCarthy in the morning as he's an Offensive Cood. to heart. Gotta give him something, lol, as he's wondering what's up with the OT's.
Time to celebrate like a true player. Peep this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbwcU2YbBRI

Scotch and hookers for Snake...err......Big Time Ted tonite. Time to celebrate. Ted just gave us our division next year. SuperBowl who? If those JAGs from Arizona can do it.....??? Ted just proved our team is stacked after today...BTW, Mission what's your phone number? Teddy is wasted. :lol: :shock: 8-)



Sounds like MM got his OT per da Snake

Or another guard, maybe. We'll see. He's built like Sitton, he'll probably play guard like Sitton. Though that would mean that Colledge could move out to tackle, so it might be okay anyhow.

[mission]

I promise to never smoke weed with Raji, offer him any, or blow any in his direction, if I happen to see him out the weekend of Nov 1st (or anywhere else at any time)... :lol:

[Gunakor]

I promise to never smoke weed with Raji, offer him any, or blow any in his direction, if I happen to see him out the weekend of Nov 1st (or anywhere else at any time)... :lol:

I swear to god Mission, if you do...

[mission]

I promise to never smoke weed with Raji, offer him any, or blow any in his direction, if I happen to see him out the weekend of Nov 1st (or anywhere else at any time)... :lol:

I swear to god Mission, if you do...

Instant ban/ass beating, I know ... :( :D

[GrnBay007]

I promise to never smoke weed with Raji, offer him any, or blow any in his direction, if I happen to see him out the weekend of Nov 1st (or anywhere else at any time)... :lol:

:lol:

[wist43]

I promise to never smoke weed with Raji, offer him any, or blow any in his direction, if I happen to see him out the weekend of Nov 1st (or anywhere else at any time)... :lol:

Alright, it goes against my will to be free... but, I promise too - for the sake of the Packers :D

[SnakeLH2006]

Lots of stuff to get back to and glad so many are happy/excited about GB football and Ted Thompson. He did pretty damn good this weekend.



Lemme get this straight....

When Snake talks in the first person, he is really talking about somebody else?

Trying to figure out who, or which, voice Snake is in can only lead to psychological problems/heavy drinking.

As a Libertarian, my preference would be light one up... but, the Victorian Nazi's that make up my fellow citizenry would send me for reeducation :D

True as Snake isn't really TT (just hung out with him Saturday nite with Snake putting down a case of PBR and TT..err...Big Time Teddy putting down a bottle and a half of Scotch...that dude can drink and took over my keyboard for a bit).

He really liked my Snake's Take for Need vs. BPA with the diminishing returns on hoarding picks (as BTT's roster is stacked with young guys and he gave creedance to needs on not only day one but day two.....really solid draft....Lang might be an OG, but even Todd McShay said Meredith is 2nd round talent with our 5th and a legit OT)....




Crabby might be great, but thank god TT reads PackerRats and avoided the Curse of Bretsky and took Snake's Take to heart. The curse is broken unless BJ becomes the Curse of Snake.

BTW, Snake is really Ted Thompson, General Manager of the Green Bay Packers...I was just testing you all, and thanks for the great insight on getting 2 starters with my draft, instead of hoarding picks. Crabby will be a Sterling Sharpe if SF ever gets a QB, but we felt everyone would love a BJ, and Ted likes a good BJ too

This stuff was priceless :!: :bclap:

TT is gonna get wasted tonite and leaves the drafting to Mike McCarthy in the morning as he's an Offensive Cood. to heart. Gotta give him something, lol, as he's wondering what's up with the OT's.
Time to celebrate like a true player. Peep this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbwcU2YbBRI

Scotch and hookers for Snake...err......Big Time Ted tonite. Time to celebrate. Ted just gave us our division next year. SuperBowl who? If those JAGs from Arizona can do it.....??? Ted just proved our team is stacked after today...BTW, Mission what's your phone number? Teddy is wasted. :lol: :shock: 8-)

Sounds like MM got his OT per da Snake

Indeed...Snake called this whole draft...to a T..or a TT (pardon the pun) and so glad me and BTT are buds now to straighten this shit out. Hypothetically, we might get 4...yes 4 day one starters out of this draft for 2009....BJ at NG, Clay at OLB, the LSU FB at FB, and maybe one or the other of Lang, maybe Meredith (both guys that were maybe 2nd round guys who slippped) at Right OT....Possible, quite so. What an insanely good draft vs. needs/value. Hats off to BTT.




I promise to never smoke weed with Raji, offer him any, or blow any in his direction, if I happen to see him out the weekend of Nov 1st (or anywhere else at any time)... :lol:

I swear to god Mission, if you do...

Instant ban/ass beating, I know ... :( :D

Snake was joking...kinda, but good to see you step up Mission and accept that mission...lol. Albeit, Nov. 1st...all bets are off, and Snake TOTALLY understands your view about that date. Hard to blame anyone for anything that happens on that date in GB.



:shock: :D 8-)

[mission]

I had a hard time following that last little blip there Snake, but I hope that means you're going to the posters' game and that we will be getting into trouble. Hopefully without the help of law enforcement or BJ Raji.

[SnakeLH2006]

I had a hard time following that last little blip there Snake, but I hope that means you're going to the posters' game and that we will be getting into trouble. Hopefully without the help of law enforcement or BJ Raji.

Snake doesn't like to say anything to insinuate or call for law enforcement. But, alas, if Snake makes it to that game. All bets are off, and Snake and Mission will be getting wasted one way or the other. Lots of wasting and hot ass bar skanks hopefully.... So hopefully a BJ is involved, just not as a player or on your behalf 8-) :shock: LOL. If Snake goes....P.A.R.T.Y.

[mission]

I had a hard time following that last little blip there Snake, but I hope that means you're going to the posters' game and that we will be getting into trouble. Hopefully without the help of law enforcement or BJ Raji.

Snake doesn't like to say anything to insinuate or call for law enforcement. But, alas, if Snake makes it to that game. All bets are off, and Snake and Mission will be getting wasted one way or the other. Lots of wasting and hot ass bar skanks hopefully.... So hopefully a BJ is involved just not as as a player or you. 8-) :shock: LOL. If Snake goes....P.A.R.T.Y.

HAHAHHA dude you crack me up.. sounds good you can crash on our hotel floor if it helps out. Hopefully you wont have to step over too many thrown-off-the-bed expired bar skanks. In the meantime, this vike has me sleeeeeepy... IM OUT!

[SnakeLH2006]

So back to topic...does anyone think TT is on the chopping block....Snake made this topic in mind BEFORE the draft....with fixing so MANY holes on D with an excellent draft....it's hard to see EVEN IF we fail in 2009 (and doubt that). He's safe cuz our cap is great, and our draft really fixed some shit. If anything MM gets the shaft for Holmy or a name coach next year if we go to shit in 2009. TT is safe no matter what now.

[mraynrand]

TT stays unless the Packers win 4 games or less. He stays this year and next if they are competitive but miss the playoffs. Three more years without the playoffs, he will be replaced. He might be able to last longer if he purges Stubby, but I doubt it. TT is like the anti-Fisher. Fisher stays alive in part by being the best buddy the press ever had. They love him in TN, but even he needs to be reasonably and consistently successful, even if he doesn't win it all.

[SnakeLH2006]

TT stays unless the Packers win 4 games or less. He stays this year and next if they are competitive but miss the playoffs. Three more years without the playoffs, he will be replaced. He might be able to last longer if he purges Stubby, but I doubt it. TT is like the anti-Fisher. Fisher stays alive in part by being the best buddy the press ever had. They love him in TN, but even he needs to be reasonably and consistently successful, even if he doesn't win it all.

Good post Mraynrand, and Snake agrees, as this may all be Kool-Aid in the Spring for all we know. I like the draft/moves to make us better (on paper) but are you serious about the bolded statement? Really? :shock: Only 3, eh? Wow. I say one maybe 2, unless the bottom falls out...That would mean we'd missed the playoffs in 7 out of 8 years...Hopefully something happens before that.

[PackerBlues]

I'm sure that Thompson's job is safe. Not that I feel that it should be. Murphy is going to stick with Thompson for as long as he can, or until his own job is on the line, due to Thompson's inability to improve the team.

Hiring Capers was brilliant in my opinion. Rumor was that they had wanted Nolen first, but I think having Capers running our Defense will improve the team Immensly. I'm looking forward to seeing a plain jane version of it in the pre-season, and really looking forward to seeing some actual blitzing of opposing QB's in the regular season AND in the Playoffs!

Now, if things go bad this year for whatever reason.....then long before Thompson's job is on the line, Mike McCaurthy will take the fall......shit will always roll down hill when :shtf: If that happens, Thompson will get at the very least, a couple more years of reprieve. During wich time, Capers would most likely be given the Head Coach position and allowed to hire an Offensive Co-ordinator of his choice.

I can list at least a dozen things off the top of my head that I would like to see Thompson canned for. Simple fact of the matter though, is that he is doing exactly what he was hired to do. It is unpopular, and that is probably a good reason why Harlan left and that Murphy is now the Club President. It was rebuilding time, and rebuilding is not a fun thing to be assosiated with in any way.

As far as the "Fans" having any say....... face it, most "Fans", probably cannot even name more than 5 players on the team off the top of their heads. Hell, most "Fans", do not even know who Thompson or Murphy or even MM are. The real fans of the Packers, are the kind of people that spend time in forums like this one, discussing the Packers top to bottom, day after day after day. Some of our opinions are not very popular.......but what would you expect when you take into consideration where the meaning of the word "fan" comes from.

Long story short, for the "fans" of Thompson and his way of doing things......... Thompson is here to stay for a while, like it or not.

[Gunakor]

I'm sure that Thompson's job is safe. Not that I feel that it should be. Murphy is going to stick with Thompson for as long as he can, or until his own job is on the line, due to Thompson's inability to improve the team.

Hiring Capers was brilliant in my opinion. Rumor was that they had wanted Nolen first, but I think having Capers running our Defense will improve the team Immensly. I'm looking forward to seeing a plain jane version of it in the pre-season, and really looking forward to seeing some actual blitzing of opposing QB's in the regular season AND in the Playoffs!

Now, if things go bad this year for whatever reason.....then long before Thompson's job is on the line, Mike McCaurthy will take the fall......shit will always roll down hill when :shtf: If that happens, Thompson will get at the very least, a couple more years of reprieve. During wich time, Capers would most likely be given the Head Coach position and allowed to hire an Offensive Co-ordinator of his choice.

I can list at least a dozen things off the top of my head that I would like to see Thompson canned for. Simple fact of the matter though, is that he is doing exactly what he was hired to do. It is unpopular, and that is probably a good reason why Harlan left and that Murphy is now the Club President. It was rebuilding time, and rebuilding is not a fun thing to be assosiated with in any way.

As far as the "Fans" having any say....... face it, most "Fans", probably cannot even name more than 5 players on the team off the top of their heads. Hell, most "Fans", do not even know who Thompson or Murphy or even MM are. The real fans of the Packers, are the kind of people that spend time in forums like this one, discussing the Packers top to bottom, day after day after day. Some of our opinions are not very popular.......but what would you expect when you take into consideration where the meaning of the word "fan" comes from.

Long story short, for the "fans" of Thompson and his way of doing things......... Thompson is here to stay for a while, like it or not.

All true. Though, I'd imagine most fans don't especially want to see TT canned. Especially after what has all transpired after the past several months. Even before this offseason, but especially at this point, I take away nothing but positives. He's made some fantastic decisions lately IMO.

[SnakeLH2006]

I'm sure that Thompson's job is safe. Not that I feel that it should be. Murphy is going to stick with Thompson for as long as he can, or until his own job is on the line, due to Thompson's inability to improve the team.

Hiring Capers was brilliant in my opinion. Rumor was that they had wanted Nolen first, but I think having Capers running our Defense will improve the team Immensly. I'm looking forward to seeing a plain jane version of it in the pre-season, and really looking forward to seeing some actual blitzing of opposing QB's in the regular season AND in the Playoffs!

Now, if things go bad this year for whatever reason.....then long before Thompson's job is on the line, Mike McCaurthy will take the fall......shit will always roll down hill when :shtf: If that happens, Thompson will get at the very least, a couple more years of reprieve. During wich time, Capers would most likely be given the Head Coach position and allowed to hire an Offensive Co-ordinator of his choice.

I can list at least a dozen things off the top of my head that I would like to see Thompson canned for. Simple fact of the matter though, is that he is doing exactly what he was hired to do. It is unpopular, and that is probably a good reason why Harlan left and that Murphy is now the Club President. It was rebuilding time, and rebuilding is not a fun thing to be assosiated with in any way.

As far as the "Fans" having any say....... face it, most "Fans", probably cannot even name more than 5 players on the team off the top of their heads. Hell, most "Fans", do not even know who Thompson or Murphy or even MM are. The real fans of the Packers, are the kind of people that spend time in forums like this one, discussing the Packers top to bottom, day after day after day. Some of our opinions are not very popular.......but what would you expect when you take into consideration where the meaning of the word "fan" comes from.

Long story short, for the "fans" of Thompson and his way of doing things......... Thompson is here to stay for a while, like it or not.

All true. Though, I'd imagine most fans don't especially want to see TT canned. Especially after what has all transpired after the past several months. Even before this offseason, but especially at this point, I take away nothing but positives. He's made some fantastic decisions lately IMO.

Snake agrees Gunakor, and good post PackerBlues, but the Kool-Aid will wear off in a few months if we don't win this year...Yes, MM will take the fall, and I like BTT (Big Time Teddy) as this topic was started way before the draft, but regardless it's a results driven league. Win or out.

It was a big risk going to 3-4 with Dom, but PB may be onto something. Was Dom given the D-Cood. position with the thought that if it flops this year, Dom will displace MM and TT is given a pass with a "new 3-4 scheme and growing pains" as an excuse? Pretty crafty shit Teddy, as they would now have to go 3-13 for Ted to take a fall, as he's safe for awhile no matter what. I can't see a scenario where Ted is fired this year for sure, but if you miss the playoffs for next 2 years out ya go. But Snake also thinks Mark and Ted seem pretty tight as Mark is really calling the shots. Either way, a big year, and MM has got to be sweating his nuts off that we make the playoffs this year. HUGE expectations not only for us Rats, but Packer Nation in general. We are used to the playoffs after the Brett era.

[SnakeLH2006]

After the draft it's all Kool-Aid yes, but thinking of renaming this Thread:

Blind Faith: Is this MM's last year as Head Coach?

Sounds more likely than Ted's last year at least. Dom will be our 2010 coach if we fail this year.

[Gunakor]

After the draft it's all Kool-Aid yes, but thinking of renaming this Thread:

Blind Faith: Is this MM's last year as Head Coach?

Sounds more likely than Ted's last year at least. Dom will be our 2010 coach if we fail this year.

I highly doubt it. Dom was brought in for the defense. I'd hate to see what could happen to this offense if left in the hands of a defensive guy.

Furthermore, MM was brought in originally because of his expertise in developing quarterbacks. With all of the young quarterbacks on our roster right now, I don't see MM going anywhere any time soon.