TTT Q and A..SERIOUSLY........some funny stuff in here

[Bretsky]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/82992147.html

[Bretsky]

the classic exchange; I use to get frustrated over TTT's saying nothing at all.....now I expect it and find it funny how he jerks guys around in these



Q. What's the one area you think the Packers need to be better to be at a Super Bowl level?

A. There's probably a lot of areas.

Q. There's got to be one thing that's foremost in your mind.

A. I'm sure there is.

Q. You're not going to tell me, are you?

A. No.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Funny how two people can read the same interview. One thinks it's funny how Thompson jerks the interviewer around. The other finds some of the questions rather appalling. Seriously, any GM that would give an honest answer to some of these questions wouldn't last in the business long.

[Bretsky]

I'd agree with both

some of the questions make Bedard come accross as a jerk; kind of like he's trying to get TT to admit he's made some mistakes....and its human nature to make mistakes

I find some of his questions stupid........and TT's answers funny as well. Almost like he was just trying to get the heck out of there.....all of the "sure" comments make me think TT wanted to roll his eyes at some of the questions

[Joemailman]

I kind of liked this one:

Q. Can you explain the decision to put cornerback Pat Lee on injured reserve before the season?

A. He was injured.

[Bossman641]

I don't understand why these reporters think they can trap TT. If he answered the majority of those questions truthfully he would be a fool.

[red]

lol

that sounds like an interview i would conduct

[Bretsky]

I liked

Do you want Clifton and Tausher back ?

Sure, if it works out for everybody


Will you make an effort to bring Ahman Green Back ?

I don't know, we'll work through that

[Zool]

I love how at the end of the season this guy has all the answers as to what went wrong. Was there a single question by that guy as to things that went well on the season?

I'd be surprised if that guy ever gets another interview.

[Joemailman]

On the question about Ahman Green, the completely honest answer would have been "Not if we draft a running back."

[Bretsky]

I don't understand why these reporters think they can trap TT. If he answered the majority of those questions truthfully he would be a fool.


I think it's a two edged sword.

I thought Ron Wolf would give reporters a good interview; but he'd often lie to them IMO. *

TT, he just refuses to give up anything...truth or lies...so I think reporters need to ask specifics...typically are not fond of dealing with him...so they try to ask specific questions to try to get something out of him.

I've listened to a couple of these guys on the radio; they all think TTT is doing a good job but some do feel he doesn't place much value on bringing in vets in certain areas to lean on for leadership. Bedard threw one of those questions at TT as well.

I don't think they enjoy speaking with TT anymore than he enjoys getting interviewed

[Zool]

When you put together your 53-man roster, you were OK with Colledge backing up an aging Clifton, who hadn't started all 16 games since 2007.....



I guess you could say that about 85% of the players in the NFL. Reporters for newspapers are getting worse by the day.

[Bretsky]

I love how at the end of the season this guy has all the answers as to what went wrong. Was there a single question by that guy as to things that went well on the season?

I'd be surprised if that guy ever gets another interview.


He's one of the Packer beat writers so my gues is TT will always give him the courtesy interview but will never give him anything for a story

[vince]

I love how at the end of the season this guy has all the answers as to what went wrong. Was there a single question by that guy as to things that went well on the season?

I'd be surprised if that guy ever gets another interview.
Agreed. I'll give Bedard the benefit of the doubt and say - what an incompetent interview. He certainly won't get another interview of any value whatsoever if he continues that approach. Did Thompson just get up and leave before finishing at the end? Nice work Greg.

As you say Zool, it’s not so much what he asked, but what he didn’t ask before what he did. Is he trying to make a name for himself as a “tough” interviewer or something? Here’s an idea Greg. How about making a name for yourself as a “good” interviewer for a change. How about being the one guy that can actually penetrate our GM instead of being another amongst the crowd of also-rans?

If Bedard’s goal was to get Thompson to clam up, dig his heels in, and offer completely worthless responses, then I’d say he succeeded with his strategy to jump right in, throw objectivity out the window, ask nothing but offensive and insulting questions and presume to know more about managing a football team than the guy he is interviewing who is paid handsomely to actually do it and has been pretty successful at it overall, particularly at this point in time.

Red hit the nail on the head. This interview is exactly one that would have come from a TT basher posing as an amateur reporter who can’t separate his fanaticism from his job and ends up closing important doors rather than opening them for us.

If you want to get someone to open up to you and tell you what they really think about challenging issues, you put your arm around them first, not punch them in the nose. The fact that Bedard completely ignores that basic fact of human nature, particularly when reality shows that there has been plenty to hug this season (along with the challenges) - his interviewee is coming off a playoff season, probably the most productive draft in the league last year, has built the youngest team in the league into what appears to be a perennial playoff contender, etc. If his goal was to challenge Thompson and actually get into his head, he should have buttered him up some and at least APPEARED to show some sense of objectivity. Unfortunately for all of us, Bedard either isn’t capable enough as an interviewer to do that – or worse, his agenda doesn’t support it.

The fact that Bedard seems to know nothing whatsoever about how to glean valuable information from an interviewee – or refuses to do so for ulterior motives – is disappointing to say the least for those who are hoping to get quality insight from his work, both now and in the future.

Bedard has quickly worn out his welcome among the real Packer insiders due to his inability to build and balance personal relationships with what he deems objective reporting. He did the same thing in Miami. He will continue to get nothing but canned bullshit from here on out, and of course, Ted’s completely to blame. Based on his history thus far, that perception will probably continue to piss him off and further degrade the objectivity and value of his work. And we're the worse off for it.

Controversy sells newspapers today I guess, but its this kind of tabloid journalism approach that will continue to lead to its rejection by those who want more depth. The professional media might just end up going bankrupt before that happens, and all of our minds will follow.

[vince]

OK, maybe I got a little carried away at the end there. :oops:

[packrulz]

When you put together your 53-man roster, you were OK with Colledge backing up an aging Clifton, who hadn't started all 16 games since 2007.....



I guess you could say that about 85% of the players in the NFL. Reporters for newspapers are getting worse by the day.
Colledge was a flop at LT this year, Lang is improving, but I still expect TT to draft an OT high this year, he's got to know Clifton/Taucher are nearing the end of their careers, we need to protect ARod.

[Bossman641]

Well said Vince. And the thing is that McGinn did the same exact thing when he interviewed him earlier in the year. I don't understand what their goal is. Like you said, if they really wanted to try and get any answers of value they would try to connect with him on a personal level first and give TT some credit rather than just start attacking from the get go.

The only really good TT article I've read was the ESPN one from a few months back. Pretty sad that the local guys haven't even come close to matching that.

[Fritz]

But Ted strikes back, and hard:

"(chuckling) I'm not going to talk about that. But I would never talk about anything like that about one of our players. I'm a little insulted you'd ask."

I think Vince has explained it in a way that makes sense and rings true. Is there anywhere in that interview in which Bedard makes reference to the team's success?

For example, I'd like to know how the Packers plan to build upon their success next year. Could Thompson have been asked what areas of the team he feels are strong? If he named two or three positions, wouldn't that tell us also which areas he feels less confident in?

Does the organization see Lang as more capable at tackle or guard?

Based strictly upon the interview, you'd think the Packers went 4-12 this year. And no, I don't want fluff - but I don't want a fruitless exercise in bashing Thompson to....what, prove a point? What point?

[KYPack]

OK, maybe I got a little carried away at the end there. :oops:

Hey, don't be so hard on yourself. I agree with you 100%. It would help if one of the papers would get a clever young writer who had an in-depth understanding of the innards of football. McGinn and Bedard don't have that kind of expertise. McGinn didn't know the difference between an over and an under front in the 4-3. He could've asked a ND type guy to get the answer before he made a goof of himself, but these guys don't want to do that level of work.

Bedard can write pretty well at times, but has a flimsy grasp of the game, espec at the pro level. It shows. a lot.

He should have tosses in a couple questions about "PAD LEVEL", just to show he's one of the boys.

[SkinBasket]

I think this made my day:


Q. You didn't think you could find some sort of veteran who could do better than Colledge?

A. Obviously not.


This is where I agree with those who think Bedard should spell his name with a R and a T:


Q. Who are the young guys that you think can play left tackle?

A. We think T.J. can.

Q. You do?

A. Yeah. And we'll see. He's got some growing to do. Several of our guys have done it. And, like I said, that wasn't the end-all, be-all.

"You do?" is his follow up? There's a quick mind sharp as a tack.

[pbmax]

When you put together your 53-man roster, you were OK with Colledge backing up an aging Clifton, who hadn't started all 16 games since 2007.....



I guess you could say that about 85% of the players in the NFL. Reporters for newspapers are getting worse by the day.
That is a perfect question. Because its specific and relevant. T2 can choose to answer or not. But its begging to be asked and someone needs to ask it. Now if he chooses not to answer, then by all means dig for sources, look at his history, talk to coaches, see if anyone was surprised Colledge struggled so much, but you need to start by asking the source.

[Smidgeon]

OK, maybe I got a little carried away at the end there. :oops:

Hey, don't be so hard on yourself. I agree with you 100%. It would help if one of the papers would get a clever young writer who had an in-depth understanding of the innards of football. McGinn and Bedard don't have that kind of expertise. McGinn didn't know the difference between an over and an under front in the 4-3. He could've asked a ND type guy to get the answer before he made a goof of himself, but these guys don't want to do that level of work.

Bedard can write pretty well at times, but has a flimsy grasp of the game, espec at the pro level. It shows. a lot.

He should have tosses in a couple questions about "PAD LEVEL", just to show he's one of the boys.

I don't know the difference (except what I've seen in Madden). Care to explain it so I can expand my football schematic knowledge?

[pbmax]

I love how at the end of the season this guy has all the answers as to what went wrong. Was there a single question by that guy as to things that went well on the season?

I'd be surprised if that guy ever gets another interview.
If Bedard’s goal was to get Thompson to clam up, dig his heels in, and offer completely worthless responses, then I’d say he succeeded with his strategy to jump right in, throw objectivity out the window, ask nothing but offensive and insulting questions and presume to know more about managing a football team than the guy he is interviewing who is paid handsomely to actually do it and has been pretty successful at it overall, particularly at this point in time.
I would be more upset by a GM who is fooled by this approach than by one who has trouble drafting guards. This is the approach of the sycophant, and if the GM has any brains and an agenda, the only time information will be granted to such an approach is if it serves his own purposes. If the reporter involved is unethical, then it becomes Chris Havel repeating whatever he is told by the subject to guarantee future access.

Bedard's mistakes are in his follow up questions, instead of asking about veterans who were not added before the beginning of the season, he should be asking whether Colledge's performance will change how he judges the team's depth at left tackle going forward. That way, if Thompson leaves a similar hole next year, you have a point of comparison from the horse's mouth.

[swede]

This is where I agree with those who think Bedard should spell his name with a R and a T:



That took me a few seconds. I was looking for something deeper, and then it hit me after I anagrammed it out a bit.

Were you the chief inventor of unfortunate nicknames for your fellow 7th graders?

[Smidgeon]

This is where I agree with those who think Bedard should spell his name with a R and a T:



That took me a few seconds. I was looking for something deeper, and then it hit me after I anagrammed it out a bit.

Were you the chief inventor of unfortunate nicknames for your fellow 7th graders?

Ah, the dream job.

[ND72]

I seriously do not like Greg Benard. "Why did you put Pat Lee on injured reserve"..."He was injured"...THANK YOU. "Do you have any regrets in your tenure so far?".....do you seriously think he's gonna answer that? And then he writes a horse shit story based off of the questions. Just stupid. Can't stand the guy. he still doesn't like Ted Thompson, and he still is sour he traded Favre.

[swede]

I use to get frustrated over TTT's saying nothing at all.....now I expect it and find it funny how he jerks guys around in these


I thought the same thing while reading the interview. TT's cordial stonewalling would be maddening if it weren't a little bit funny.

Other than the last negative shot I didn't find Bedard's questions to be too unfair. Most questions were framed around negative issues, but I thought McGinn was less fair than Bedard.

[bobblehead]

I seriously do not like Greg Benard. "Why did you put Pat Lee on injured reserve"..."He was injured"...THANK YOU. "Do you have any regrets in your tenure so far?".....do you seriously think he's gonna answer that? And then he writes a horse shit story based off of the questions. Just stupid. Can't stand the guy. he still doesn't like Ted Thompson, and he still is sour he traded Favre.

You must not read bedard much. He supported TT pretty much every step of the way regarding Brent. He actually gives TT credit for building a young and talented team quite often.

The pat lee Q was relevant, many thought he shouldn't have DLed him for the year because he could have been ready by week 6? or so. He DLed him for a roster spot and so he could keep him around and give him another off season to improve.

Was it a great interview....no, but I think many are over reacting.

[ND72]

i must read him wrong then, cause I usually sense he comes after Thompson. i generally don't like him by default though.

[vince]

Was it a great interview....no, but I think many are over reacting.
I'm not sure you can overreact to this one. The fact that TT unsuccessfully tried to hold back laughter at a number of his questions, has to explicitly mention he was insulted that Bedard would repeatedly ask him to comment publicly about individual contract negotiations after stating he wasn't going to, and appears to have gotten up and walked out in the middle of the interview says about all that needs to be said about this interviewer's ability and/or agenda.

All he would have had to do was be somewhat balanced in his questioning and show just a modicum of respect to the obvious sensitivity of publicly discussing individual financial negotiations and asking TT to assassinate the character or ability of specific individuals on the team. Obviously, commenting on that is not in the best interests of anyone, and that's about all Bedard asked him to do the whole interview.

Sitting one-on-one with the GM is a big opportunity for the reporter - and the public by extention. Bedard almost completely wasted it at least in terms of learning anything relevant or interesting about the man and the team.

[SkinBasket]

Without hearing the actual interview it's difficult to say for sure, but the transcript does read like Ted is about 4x smarter than Bedard and is enjoying toying with him until the last quarter or so when he just gets bored and eventually finds something else to occupy his attention.

[pbmax]

I don't remember Bedard's stance on Favre-A-Palooza 2008, he does not get as many columns as McGinn and Silverstein. He does have the blog, but I don't remember his take.

He definitely does not get Thompson's approach to building a team, he has referenced that before. But I do not mind impertinent questions based on the inability to see the logic behind the moves nor do I care if Thompson laughs or refuses to answer. But in cases where he gets a response (Left Tackle, Colledge and Lang for instance) he failed to draw Thompson out on how he sees Colledge now, instead asking questions about veteran decisions that T2 is not going to revisit. It was a missed opportunity.

The only question that was a non-starter was AJ Hawk taking a paycut. Thompson has revealed little of himself but one of the things he has said is that he would consider a discussion of a topic like that to be a personal affront. And the reasoning behind the question is faulty. Its like they think this is 1995, 1998, or 2003 and the Packers are up against the cap. Get it through your head Greg, there will be no cap next year and even if there is, Hawk's contract fits.

He has just go to be smarter about what to ask. Its not reassuring when McGinn is the best questioner on this paper and he speaks to Thompson once a year.

[vince]

The only question that was a non-starter was AJ Hawk taking a paycut.
The following (at minimum) are all non-starters in my opinion for any GM. Thompson either either shouldn't answer them or there is only one way he can answer them, so why ask? Sure TT could deflect and go off on a tangent in response to them, but IMO these questions as posed are ignorantly crafted and/or shouldn't be answered direclty other than with the limited responses Thompson offered.


Q. You didn't think you could find some sort of veteran who could do better than Colledge?
A. Obviously not.

Q. Do you think those guys are coached up well enough?
A. (chuckling) Yeah. Yes I do.

Q. Because this isn't just a one-year problem. The struggles on the line have been going on for at least three years. These are the players you put in place. It seems like it's either the players or the coaching.
A. Well, yeah, we're not going to play the blame game.

Q. Are you actively trying to re-sign any of your unrestricted free agents?
A. We're having conversations with a lot of our guys.

Q. Will you make an effort to bring Green back?
A. I don't know. We'll work through that.

Q. So you think he can play in this league?
A. Sure.

Q. So you don't know yet if it was the players or the scheme?
A. I think it was all of us.

Q. So you think the game is important to him?
A. Sure.

Q. Do you want linebacker Aaron Kampman back?
A. Sure.

Q. Will you make an effort to bring him back?
A. Sure.

Q. You think he's a good 3-4 outside linebacker?
A. Yeah, he's a good player. You can never have too many good players.

Q. Will you definitely make him an offer?
A. I'm sure we will. But we don't talk business.

Q. Will you ask linebacker A.J. Hawk to take a pay cut?
A. (chuckling) I'm not going to talk about that. But I would never talk about anything like that about one of our players. I'm a little insulted you'd ask.

Q. What's the one area you think the Packers need to be better to be at a Super Bowl level?
A. There's probably a lot of areas.

Q. There's got to be one thing that's foremost in your mind.
A. I'm sure there is.

Q. You're not going to tell me, are you?
A. No.

Q. What's the biggest regret you have during your tenure?
A. Oh. (Didn't answer).

[Zool]

When you put together your 53-man roster, you were OK with Colledge backing up an aging Clifton, who hadn't started all 16 games since 2007.....



I guess you could say that about 85% of the players in the NFL. Reporters for newspapers are getting worse by the day.
That is a perfect question. Because its specific and relevant. T2 can choose to answer or not. But its begging to be asked and someone needs to ask it. Now if he chooses not to answer, then by all means dig for sources, look at his history, talk to coaches, see if anyone was surprised Colledge struggled so much, but you need to start by asking the source.

My point on this one is the ridiculousness of the questions wording. Clifton hadn't played a full season since 1 season ago? Any player who missed a single game in '08 is under that same scrutiny then. Its like he has as angry 12 year old writing down questions and he's just parroting them.

[pbmax]

The only question that was a non-starter was AJ Hawk taking a paycut.
The following (at minimum) are all non-starters in my opinion for any GM. Thompson either either shouldn't answer them or there is only one way he can answer them, so why ask? Sure TT could deflect and go off on a tangent in response to them, but IMO these questions as posed are ignorantly crafted and/or shouldn't be answered direclty other than with the limited responses Thompson offered.
Most of what you have listed here are follow ups and several are horrible, clearly when Bedard was frustrated. And I earlier pointed to one he blew with bad follow up questions. But each of the original questions and their topic is legit save one. In fact, each has probably been the topic of a thread here and at every other Packer message board. Bedard clearly is an unskilled interviewer. But I stand by what you quoted me on, the only non-starter was Hawk's contract.

Clifton's backups
Coaching versus talent on O Line
Negotiations with Packer UFAs
Ahman Green
Breno Giacomini on the roster despite not playing. Everyone agreed a second punter was a waste of a roster spot. Is it better to have a backup Right Tackle who cannot play rather than a second punter? Both have the same current usefulness.
Meltdowns versus Pittsburgh and Arizona.
Kampman
Area needing improvement

Worst topic is Hawk

Second worst was question on regret.

[superfan]

It appears safe to assume that Greg Bedard does not secretly have a PR account under the name "vince". :lol:

[RashanGary]

Nice post, Vince. These guys never get us anything, ever and it's obvious the questions they ask are a big part of the reason.

[pbmax]

I don't know about that JH. I have lived in other NFL cities and I have seen much worse coverage. Bedard may leave much to be desired as an interviewer, but McGinn and Wilde are not bad. McGinn is among the top beat writers in the league. And you have two papers (maybe three, I am unsure if the State Journal will continue to send a reporter to Green Bay after Wilde left) covering the team.

What would be fascinating is to see if Thompson could manage to evade answers like that in New York, Boston or Philly. Whether their coverage is better is debatable, but they drive the storyline and force teams to react unlike Chicago, Milwaukee, Green Bay or Minneapolis. I think he would need to compromise. Wolf had the personality to carry some of this off, Thompson has less margin for error.

Rosenthal, who covers the NFL for PFT and Rotoworld, doesn't think its lacking.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/25/nolan-turned-down-packers-gig-last-year/

[MJZiggy]

You can see over the course of that interview, Thompson's answers getting more curt, shorter and revealing less and less until they gave nothing at all. I for one would have liked to know where TT saw the biggest improvement in the team this year. If he thought this year's draft class was strong in cornerbacks, if considering that you're always looking to add the best players, there was any position he thought could use a little more depth, what implications the lack of a CBA would have on his offseason planning, whether he thought the owners/NFLPA might get a new deal worked out anytime soon, what his biggest point of pride was this season, why the kickers leaguewide seemed to miss more often this year--especially at critical moments, whether the fact that we have the youngest team for the last few years is a symptom of rebuilding, a point of pride or if his goal is to have the team stick together and mature as a team together. Who his pick was for the SB, his main offseason goal (get the team bigger, stronger, faster, what?) What he looks for when evaluating a young safety/runningback...

I think you get my point. What would you rather he'd asked?

[Maxie the Taxi]

You can see over the course of that interview, Thompson's answers getting more curt, shorter and revealing less and less until they gave nothing at all. I for one would have liked to know where TT saw the biggest improvement in the team this year. If he thought this year's draft class was strong in cornerbacks, if considering that you're always looking to add the best players, there was any position he thought could use a little more depth, what implications the lack of a CBA would have on his offseason planning, whether he thought the owners/NFLPA might get a new deal worked out anytime soon, what his biggest point of pride was this season, why the kickers leaguewide seemed to miss more often this year--especially at critical moments, whether the fact that we have the youngest team for the last few years is a symptom of rebuilding, a point of pride or if his goal is to have the team stick together and mature as a team together. Who his pick was for the SB, his main offseason goal (get the team bigger, stronger, faster, what?) What he looks for when evaluating a young safety/runningback...

I think you get my point. What would you rather he'd asked?

I noticed the deterioration too. Why not? It seemed Bedard's innuendo was getting more and more nasty as the interview went on. Came across very arrogant, vindictive and stupid.

Actually, some of the things he asked are legitimate and I would have liked to hear what TT had to say, but Bedard got snotty and TT clammed up.

I would have like to hear TT's explanation of the whole Anthony Smith saga. If Bedard would have asked: "Ted, would you mind sharing your thoughts on the reasons Anthony Smith was let go in the Spring?" Maybe he could have caught more answers with honey rather than vinegar. You can't treat an interviewee as an adversary and then expect cooperation.

I'd also be interested on Ted's take on Breno Giacomini and Pat Lee. I would have asked Ted to describe what attracted him to these players in the draft and how that compares/contrasts to their performance in the NFL.

If I wanted to stretch the envelope, I would have asked him about MM not using the running game and Dom not blitzing in the playoffs, but I would have not asked it directly. I would have asked TT for his thoughts on the current trends in the NFL...does he feel the league is becoming a passing league, or whether the 3-4 defense is the wave of the future and, if so, will it put a premium on certain types of players coming out of the draft.

I was always taught to ask open-ended questions, not questions that could be answered with a simple Yes/No.

[MJZiggy]

Exactly. 8th grade journalism--never ask a yes/no question in an interview and your favorite word is "why."

[Patler]

I wasn't going to read it, I skip a lot of what Bedard writes. But, I did, and, as usual, I have a lot to comment on. A golden opportunity to develop a trusting relationship seems to have been wasted. I don't think GM's expect kid glove treatment, but they do expect to be treated professionally and with courtesy even when hard questions are asked. This interview seemed to lack common courtesy.

The following is an example of why I believe Bedard is a poor interviewer. It seems he didn't do adequate research and let his own bias, opinion or ego get in the way of forming proper questions to gain information or insight. To top it off, he didn't listen to the answers and base follow ups on the answers:


Q. But obviously the offensive line was affected by the situation at left tackle, with Chad Clifton getting hurt and Daryn Colledge and T.J. Lang having to play there. When you put together your 53-man roster, you were OK with Colledge backing up an aging Clifton, who hadn't started all 16 games since 2007 and was coming off four surgeries?

A. Well, that was one of the plans. The thing that I think is overlooked sometimes is you can't have a left tackle ready to play that's sitting on the bench in the NFL. There's not that many of them. There's not 32 of them. We happen to have one and we actually have a couple of young guys, including T.J. Lang, that we think can play out there. But when you get hurt at a position as valuable as left tackle, you're going to take some lumps. Now, we've done that in the past and we've been able to play our way through it and win some games. We struggled a little bit more this year.

Q. But Colledge seemed to be your Plan A. . . .

A. Yeah, he's done it before. And we have several players on our line that played left tackle one way or the other. But it is what it is. If we would have had a better left tackle somewhere that we could have had on our 53, we would have had 'em.

Q. You didn't think you could find some sort of veteran who could do better than Colledge?

A. Obviously not.

Q. Who are the young guys that you think can play left tackle?

A. We think T.J. can.

Q. You do?

This is a bad line of questions that originated with a very poor initial question. The first question implied that TT should have known prior to the season that Clifton would miss games, because he "hadn't started all 16 games since 2007 and was coming off four surgeries". The lead-in question carries very negative implications based on inaccuracies, and I suspect it angered TT a bit, or at least put him on the defensive. The question is bad because:

- "since 2007" means he missed a start one season, 2008. That shows no trend. But it sounds worse than that.
- the surgeries were minor "clean-up" procedures.
- Clifton is getting up there, but at 33 with 10 years in he isn't ancient yet.
- in the 6 seasons since the Sapp-caused injury, Clifton missed 2 starts, neither one due to injury. He missed one game when he came down with the flu the morning of the game, and he missed the second due to an adverse reaction to an injection just before the game.
- Colledge played "OK" filling in during those misses. In fact, last year after the reaction wore off Clifton was cleared to play the second half, but didn't because the line was playing OK with Colledge at LT.
- Clifton had said he was rejuvenated by the surgeries, and had actually been practicing more than in recent years as a result.

Based on the facts, instead of implying that TT should have known better, he could have asked an "If you had known..." type question. For example, something like; "The offensive line was affected by the situation at left tackle when Chad Clifton got hurt early and missed multiple games for the first time in 7 years. When you put together your 53-man roster, if you had known that would happen, would you have done anything different? What could you have done?"

That may have gotten a weak answer about being OK with Colledge, since he had backed up there previously; but then the natural follow-up, which was never asked, is this; "Colledge seemed to play OK at LT a couple times in the past. Some have even suggested it might be his best position. What caused him to struggle there this year?" and after that..."Will Colledge be in your thinking for LT again, or do you now view him as only a guard?" and still further; "Long term you have to be thinking about tackles, is Colledge a consideration at RT? He played well at Detroit in 2008."

The follow-up questions he did use were as bad or worse than the initial question. TT suggested there are not even enough LTs to go around as starters, yet Bedard asked a question that seems to imply TT should have been able to find a capable vet as a backup. Bedard knew this would be a line of questioning. If he feels TT dropped the ball, he should have had a few names to offer, guys that were available when Clifton got hurt, or that were available in the off season and would have been satisfied with backup roles.

TT said they think Lang can play LT, then Bedard asked what young guys could play LT and seems surprised when TT again said Lang. It would have been better to just dig a little deeper. Is Lang just a capable fill-in at LT or could he be a starter at LT? He seems to lack some of the physical characteristics of the good LTs, what does he have that makes up for it?

He goes on to harp about Giacomini, but left out the obvious player to ask about on the line - Barbre.

My pick for the absolute worst question asked:


Q. Did the addition of Tauscher and running back Ahman Green - and their contributions in the locker room - open your eyes a little bit more to the value of veteran players?

Are you kidding me? He asked that question, in that way, to a man who played in the NFL for 10 years and has been involved in player acquisitions for 18 years? Tauscher and Green in a half season would "open your eyes"? Instead, why not a question like; "Tauscher and Green seemed to have a very positive effect on the team in the locker room, even beyond their contributions on the field. How do you personally weigh the choice between a grizzled old vet who can help with team chemistry, like Tauscher or Green, and the younger player who won't be a starter but can maybe give you a special teams body, or the real "project" like Giacomini seems to be?" "You seem to favor going young in those close situations, is that because you are looking for rare late bloomers, like Driver sort of was? How much does money factor in, a rookie minimum salary perhaps versus the close to a million that the veteran gets? Good businesses do not waste money, and it's not a small amount of money, especially if there are two or three positions decided that way. It could be several million dollars in difference. How much do you think about that?"

Instead of asking TT to "explain the decision" on Lee, which implies "justify it" why not just ask how long he thought Lee would be out at the time? It gets the information you want without putting they guy on the defensive. I would have asked where Lee would have fit in at corner, ahead of Blackmon? Behind?

Asking if the game is "important" to Lee? What was that about?

His line of questioning about Smith was confrontational as well for no good reason, and was not likely to get any kind of information in response. It's not like the guy is a real gem, St Louis didn't keep him and only played him in 2 games as it was. Bedard seems disbelieving that Smith was not a consideration before all the injuries and when others (like Martin) were available, but was a consideration as the ranks were depleted.

Rather than Smith, a better line of questions might have been about cutting Aaron Rouse just a few weeks later. Rouse started the last 8 games for the Giants. Rouse was cut before the trade deadline, did TT look for any trading partners?


A wasted opportunity, in my opinion.

[Patler]

Exactly. 8th grade journalism--never ask a yes/no question in an interview and your favorite word is "why."

Actually, I think yes/no questions can be a very useful tool, but not if used exclusively. Get the interviewee to commit to a position (Yes/no type question), THEN, force an explanation to be given.

The problem is Bedard seemed to approach this as a cross-examination, which usually focuses on yes/no type questions. That can be good to identify points of controversy for later argument, but it is not ever very informative in and of itself. It is designed to raise questions or doubts, not to provide information or explanations. A good news reporter asks our questions for us, or at least provides us with the information to answer our questions. All this interview did was raise more questions, in my mind.

This suggests a reporter with an agenda, not a reporter looking to provide objective information.

[pbmax]

Based on the facts, instead of implying that TT should have known better, he could have asked an "If you had known..." type question. For example, something like; "The offensive line was affected by the situation at left tackle when Chad Clifton got hurt early and missed multiple games for the first time in 7 years. When you put together your 53-man roster, if you had known that would happen, would you have done anything different? What could you have done?"

That may have gotten a weak answer about being OK with Colledge, since he had backed up there previously; but then the natural follow-up, which was never asked, is this; "Colledge seemed to play OK at LT a couple times in the past. Some have even suggested it might be his best position. What caused him to struggle there this year?" and after that..."Will Colledge be in your thinking for LT again, or do you now view him as only a guard?" and still further; "Long term you have to be thinking about tackles, is Colledge a consideration at RT? He played well at Detroit in 2008."
Follow-up questions 2-4 are great. But the first question gives the interviewee an out: "if you had known..."

I don't think that you can put the opt-out answer in your question. The simpler, the better. "Since 2007" is misleading but four surgeries are not minor. And Clifton, unlike the past, has been talking about wanting to play past this contract. I don't think much stock can be put in "four surgeries and I feel years younger". Of course he would say that, he wants another contract.

"Chad Clifton had just come off four surgeries and is a ten year vet. Has this experience changed your thinking about players switching positions to backup such an important position?"

I am not even a fan of that question, but at least he has to explain himself. I would prefer one similar to one of Patler's follow-ups:

"Were you surprised to see Colledge struggle so much at LT?"

"Do you see a future at LT for Colledge after seeing him in 2009?"

"Was it wise to not give Colledge LT snaps before releasing Plan C (Moll) and D (Meredith) at the position?"

"Does the difficulty of finding snaps for 4 Left Tackles argue to you for a veteran backup who may need less snaps to be ready?"

[mraynrand]

I think Chris Farley would have conducted a better interview.

"Ted, remember when you played for the Oilers?"

"Yes."

"And when you sacked Ken Anderson?"

"Yes."

"That was...AWESOME!"

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_dlnpFHmOv2Q/SqlU0Vv0xkI/AAAAAAAAADQ/QA22ah6Jirc/s320/chris-farley.jpg

[MichiganPackerFan]

Too bad we couldn't get one of our more informed Rats to conduct an interview...

[swede]

Too bad we couldn't get one of our more informed Rats to conduct an interview...

Are any of the amateur bloggers from the bigger sites getting any media access in Green Bay?

[Fritz]

Skin: Ted, does Atari Bigby have compromising pictures of you or something? Oh, and my follow up: if so, can I get Atari's address? I have this hobby on the Packerrats site...

Red: Why can't you get and keep a damn punter?

Patler: Shawn Slocum? James Campen? How do you feel about McCarthy's ability to find good assistants, particularly when he promotes?

KY: Why has Cinci been able to mold offensive linemen out of lumps of clay, while many of your picks have remained lumps of clay?

Fritz: Say, do you by any chance know Drew Barrymore?

[Joemailman]

Skin: Ted, does Atari Bigby have compromising pictures of you or something? Oh, and my follow up: if so, can I get Atari's address? I have this hobby on the Packerrats site...

Red: Why can't you get and keep a damn punter?

Patler: Shawn Slocum? James Campen? How do you feel about McCarthy's ability to find good assistants, particularly when he promotes?

KY: Why has Cinci been able to mold offensive linemen out of lumps of clay, while many of your picks have remained lumps of clay?

Fritz: Say, do you by any chance know Drew Barrymore?

Bretsky: Do you know what the hell Free Agency is?

[get louder at lambeau]

I say we start a petition to fire Bedard and have him replaced by Patler. Who's with me?

Petition To Replace Bedard
1. get louder at lambeau
2.

[MichiganPackerFan]

I say we start a petition to fire Bedard and have him replaced by Patler. Who's with me?

Petition To Replace Bedard
1. get louder at lambeau
2. MPF

I'm on board (even though a PR petition is about as useful as a poll here!!!)

[Patler]

I say we start a petition to fire Bedard and have him replaced by Patler. Who's with me?

Petition To Replace Bedard
1. get louder at lambeau
2.

The extra income would be nice, not to mention the press pass to games! :lol: :lol:

[vince]

And we'd all be more informed regarding the Packers too!

That reminds me of the April Fools joke you played Patler a few years back that I fell hook, line and sinker for! You were so sincere and I forgot what day it was. :oops:

[Patler]

That reminds me of the April Fools joke you played Patler a few years back that I fell hook, line and sinker for! You were so sincere and I forgot what day it was. :oops:

Ya, that one worked quite well! :lol:
But when I started to get some real nice personal messages from people, I started to feel guilty for having done it! I had to "come clean" about it fairly quickly.

[HowardRoark]

I noticed Bud Lea has an article about Forrest Gregg in PI today, and I did a quick "is Bud Lea still alive?" in my head. Of course I had to do the Google search to see what he is up to these days and ran across this interview from last spring. A very nice walk down memory lane for Wisconsin sports:

http://onmilwaukee.com/sports/articles/budleatalks.html?viewall=1

I am in no way comparing the two men, but this was interesting after reading through this thread last night.......


OMC: What was it like dealing with Lombardi? Did you know at the time that he would be revered as a larger-than-life coaching legend?

BL: Lombardi will always stand out at the head of the list of sports personalities I covered because I had never met a man quite like him. He was brilliant, tough, emotional, unpredictable, moody. And, oh yes, he was a perfectionist. He often talked about playing a game that was free from error, physical and mental.

After the Packers lost a game, you didn't know what to expect when you walked into his locker room. Often, you didn't know what to expect when his Packers won.

Most of his post-game press conferences were made up of short answers to sports writers' short questions. Anyone who asked a dumb question would get a go-to-hell snarl, and he volunteered nothing.

When I couldn't get up to Green Bay, say, following a game in Baltimore, I would have to call him at 10:45 a.m. sharp on Monday to get any kind of follow-up story. I prepared my questions in advance, and it was an awful ordeal going one-on-one with him. He answered a few with short answers and then said, "How many more? When I said, "I'm just getting started," he replied, "I've got to get to work." I absolutely dreaded those calls.