Wolf and Thompson - JSO Article

[Fritz]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/93422149.html

On the one hand, the article begins with an interesting comparison of the current Packer team and the 96 team. The parallels are quite close and so that was interesting.

The article then goes on to criticize Thompson for not bringing in any veteran help when the team is seemingly so close. In contrast, Wolf brought in Dotson, Ron Cox, Don Beebe, et al, and traded for Eugene Robinson. The major source of support for this criticism is Leroy Butler.

The article does not however mention which free agents exactly that Thompson should have pursued to put this team over the top. I am trying to think of what players - specifically outside 3-4 linebackers - this team should have pursued that would have been an upgrade. Who was out there who is not washed up?

Since the 90's teams have learned how to use the league's salary structure to keep their own. This was not the case back in Wolf's day. Thus there are not the number of quality players available to Thompson that were available to Wolf.

The article also does not mention who would realistically be available in a trade. And at what position?

Finally, the article criticizes Thompson for letting Kampman "get away." Okay, good Packer rats, raise your hand if you think that Kampman A) would have stayed in a 3-4 for any money, and B) was really the answer at OLB.

It's an article designed to cause a ruckus. That's okay, but it would have helped had the writer offered some realistic possibilities as to who was available and who would have been an upgrade and not just a name.

[sharpe1027]

This year was an oddity because of the salary cap changes that mucked up the free agency market. I have yet to see anyone present a solid argument for players the Packers missed out on. That says a lot. Usually this is the time of year that people are jumping up and down about players X, Y and Z being signed by other teams and not the Packers. There just doesn't seem to be much out there.

[rbaloha1]

LB does have valid points albeit it is different eras. Outside of Woodson and Pickett, TT failed to sign more impact free agents. Without a doubt, RW's free agents significantly contributed to the super bowl years.

LB fails to mention that the Packers are the 18th youngest team. TT is relying more on "veterans" from within. Does LB want the Packers to be in the top 5 of the oldest teams? TT does sign older proven Packers (Driver, Pickett, Clifton, Woodson, Harris). Yes, it would be nice a few Jared Allens.

The RW legacy is secure. Trust TT shall have his own.

[bobblehead]

Yea, its foolish to compare a completly different era. Let me tell you what I know.

Keys to building a winner in the NFL:

1) Franchise QB (wolf, check, TT, check)

2) Franchise LT (wolf, struggled, but drafted high picks trying, TT, check. he inherited one and may have hit on another now)

3) Pass Rush/DL (wolf, check, God was on his side and handed him Reggie. TT, struggled, but has drafted high picks trying. Finally hit with Mathews)

Wolf flopped drafting Michaels, Verba, and Wahle to be the franchise LT, but finally hit on Clifton.

TT flopped on the DL/pass rush so far drafting Harrell, Raji et al, but finally hit on Mathews. Its also too early to grade Raji as a flop, but he hasn't done much yet.

Free Agency....Wolf had a lot more to pick from, but he got a defensive MVP in Reggie White...TT got one in Woodson.

Just remember, emotional players (Like Butler) and fans (all of us) always think their team is that ONE marquee FA away from winning it all, but TT is on the right strategy. Super Bowls in this era are won from within and through the draft (and a little luck). So far teams that make huge trades for JAllen or JCutler, or sign big tickets like Nate Clemens or AHaynesworth or JPeppers haven't been too successful.

Sure the Moss trade worked for a year, but the Patriots sold out that year and still came up short. now they are paying the price (cut AThomas).

Bottom line is the same as I said last year: TT has the right method, now he has to prove his eye for talent is good enough. I said last year if he failed to win 10 games I would be off the bandwagon. We won 11. This year we must win 10 again AND win a playoff game (or 2 or more). It will help if we don't lose 4 DB's to injury and have Jarret Bush manning the nickel again. It will also help if our RT isn't a turnstile. Me, I'm a fan of TT and have been all along, but I'm a fan....if things crumble I can turn on him like a woman on her period.

[Scott Campbell]

Me, I'm a fan of TT and have been all along, but I'm a fan....if things crumble I can turn on him like a woman on her period.

I think a lot of people would have turned on him if he hadn't stopped the bleeding on the OL during last season.

It's a big year for this front office. They're not coming off losing their franchise QB, and they're not coming off a disappointing 6-10 season. Expectations are high, and I think that's fair. Especially when he's basically said that he likes his guys.

[Lurker64]

When writers do articles like this, it's a tremendous oversight when they don't consider how free agency has changed throughout the years. Teams are much, much, much better at managing the cap now than they used to be. It used to be that you could grab quality players in free agency because they end up being cap casualties for a team who has made a bad decision or two. Nowadays, however, that almost never happens. Very few players who a team wants to keep make it into free agency, and if they do it's because the team made a mistake in structuring his contract (c.f. Rolle with the Cardinals this year).

In the Wolf era, if you signed "the best of what's there" you would end up with some good players. In the Thompson era, if you signed "the best of what's there" you will occasionally get a good player, but you're more likely to end up with a lot of rejects. This doesn't mean that Free Agency is worthless now, it's just a lot harder now than when Wolf was doing it.

Interestingly, I believe that the recent uptick of trades in the NFL (there were very, very few until the Broncos traded Portis for Bailey) is due to the growing realization that you're simply not going to get that difference making player in free agency. If somebody was going to make a big difference for you, he probably would have made one for his former team, who let him walk.

[Cleft Crusty]

"Keys to building a winner in the NFL: "

?Clefty wonders why Coach is missing from this list. Perhaps you are just concentrating on players, so that would explain it. Still, coaching makes a huge difference. Clefty is reminded of the 1981 SF 49ers, loaded with a host of rookies (Lott, Wright, and Williamson) in the defensive backfield and one off the street character (Dwight Hicks) being coached up by a combination of George Seifert and Ray Rhodes. So Clefty believes that all those player acquisitions are important, and agrees with your parallels between the '96 and '10 teams, but the coaches may be key, especially in an era of reduced free agency and Thompson's strong bias towards building through the draft.

[CaptainKickass]

I'm pretty sure there is one case in point argument for TT's approach.

The one run Seattle had to the SB. I'm pretty sure TT proceeded in much the same way with building the ChickenHawks as he has with the Pack thus far.

Now - certainly the Chickens didn't win it - but the players were there, they were built much the same way, and had a chance to get the Lombardi trophy.

I think the talent on this team is fantastic. It is absolutely up to the coaching staff to put these talented men in a position to succeed.

[ThunderDan]

Now - certainly the Chickens didn't win it - but the players were there, they were built much the same way, and had a chance to get the Lombardi trophy.


Neither did the Steelers in my book. I chalk that SB to the zebras.

[CaptainKickass]

Now - certainly the Chickens didn't win it - but the players were there, they were built much the same way, and had a chance to get the Lombardi trophy.


Neither did the Steelers in my book. I chalk that SB to the zebras.

Can't disagree with that. The Seattle locals refer to Pittsburgh as the "Steal-ers"

[bobblehead]

"Keys to building a winner in the NFL: "

?Clefty wonders why Coach is missing from this list. Perhaps you are just concentrating on players, so that would explain it. Still, coaching makes a huge difference. Clefty is reminded of the 1981 SF 49ers, loaded with a host of rookies (Lott, Wright, and Williamson) in the defensive backfield and one off the street character (Dwight Hicks) being coached up by a combination of George Seifert and Ray Rhodes. So Clefty believes that all those player acquisitions are important, and agrees with your parallels between the '96 and '10 teams, but the coaches may be key, especially in an era of reduced free agency and Thompson's strong bias towards building through the draft.

Oversight on my part:

Wolf went out and got a west coast coach who had a reputation for developing a QB and being able to design an offensive gameplan to score on anyone.

TT went out and got a west coach coach who showed some good promise in developing QB's and designing offensive gameplans that managed to score even with retards like Aaron Brooks at the QB position.

[3irty1]

The article fails to mention the contributions of:

Craig Newsome, 1st round pick of the 1995 draft as well as starting corner, circus-catch-interception-maker, and fumble-forcer of Superbowl XXXI.

William Henderson, 3rd round pick of the 1995 draft as well as starting fullback of Superbowl XXXI who would go on to become a probowler.

Antonio Freeman, 3rd round pick of the 1995 NFL draft as well as starting WR and go-ahead-record-length-touchdown-catcher of Superbowl XXXI. He'd also made numberous plays in the playoffs as a rookie and would go on to be a probowler and receive phat lewt contract after which he never tried again--still a great draft pick though.

Travis Jervey, 5th round selection in the 1995 draft who would later go to the Probowl with the Packers for his exceptional contributions on kick coverage.

Adam Timmerman, 7th round pick in the 1995 draft and starting right guard of Super Bowl XXXI who would later become a two time probowler.

These guys had as much to do with the magical free agent signings of the '95 offseason and if there's anything we can learn from this its that it doesn't matter where the players come from.

[Joemailman]

I disagree with Butler's criticism because I disagree with his premise that there is a huge gap between the Packers and Vikings if Favre comes back. There is not. Last year the Vikings were fortunate to play the Packers twice when the Packers OL was in disarray. Neither Clifton or Tauscher played against the Vikings last year. Unfortunately, Allen Barbre did. The Packers were 7-1 in the 2nd half of the season, while the Vikings were 5-3. If the two teams had played each other in the 2nd half of the season, I think there is a very good chance the Packers would have beaten them.

[mraynrand]

Good points Joe. I also note that this year, like last, the Vikings escape without having to play in a cold Lambeau. If you look at the Vikings schedule, they have a very comfortable late Nov. and Dec schedule with home games and a road dome game. Coincidence? It's a good thing I'm not a conspiracy theory guy, or I might be suspicious about this one....

[hoosier]

Agree that article is short-sighted and deficient for its failure to consider how FA has changed in the last twenty years, and for failing to look at what additions TT could have made if he really wanted to. It does, however, offer the NYJ as a contrast. And what additions did the Jets make? They traded a for Antonio Cromartie (in exchange for a #3 w/ possibility of becoming a #2) and they signed a slew of FAs including some former stars who are now on their last legs (LT, Jason Taylor), a serviceable kicker (Nick Folk), a special teams specialist (Lance Laury) and some depth in the secondary (Brodney Poole). Would the Packers have been a better team if TT had successfully pursued any of these players? It's hard to say. None of them look as productive as Santana Dotson, who was a productive but unhappy Buccaneer still in his prime. But Beebe, Wilkerson and Howard looked like they were all but washed up when Wolf signed them in '96, and they both turned out to be surprise key contributors. Of the guys signed by the Jets I think Cromartie and Taylor would clearly improve GBs depth at important positions, but it's impossible to say whether Taylor would have considered Green Bay and equally hard to say whether Cromartie's on again, off again talent would be worth the investment.

[The Leaper]

I agree with hoosier...free agency has come a long way since the mid-90s. Wolf had opportunities then that no one has now. He took advantage of that, to his credit.

The basic truth that has never been disproven over time is that a championship team is built through the draft first and foremost. Yeah, it usually take a couple solid free agent acquisitions filling key holes as well...but the nucleus of any consistent title contender comes from strength obtained via the draft. If any team could disprove that notion, it was the mid-90 Packers...who did obtain a wealth of talent via free agency/trade. But guys like Levens, Butler, Chmura, Henderson, Bennett, Freeman, Newsome, Brooks, etc. were needed as much as the free agents were.

[ND72]

Lets face how lucky we were in the 90's to land Reggie White, Sean Jones, Santana Dotson and grab Eugene Robinson. the fact is there is nearly nobody that would compare to any of those guy for us right now. Granted there were a few safeties I would have like for us to bring in, but that's fine. There just hasn't been the splash FA guys like there were back then.

I still remember watching WBAY when Santana Dotson landed at the airport and interviewed him. I was so excited, I told my dad that night he would be a huge reason we win a super bowl, and i was right. Jones, Dotson, Brown, and White...I mean that was an amazing DL. For a 3-4 defense, i think we have a pretty talented DL in Jenkins, Pickett, Jolly, Raji, and hopefully Neal & Wilson. I think we have a solid DL.

I would love for us bring in a good OLB, but I like our LBs.

Our DB's worry me, mostly because of our depth. I like our top 3 CB, but as we found out, if one goes down it is ugly. I think Burnett is gonna be a big pick for us.

Offensively, everything is there. We could have, or should have, the most potent offense in the entire NFL.

[bobblehead]

I would love for us bring in a good OLB, but I like our LBs.

Our DB's worry me, mostly because of our depth. I like our top 3 CB, but as we found out, if one goes down it is ugly. I think Burnett is gonna be a big pick for us.
.

If ONE goes down?? Don't you mean if Lee, Blackman, and Harris goes down?? I admit, if you get to your 6th DB playing the nickel it gets ugly.

[CaptainKickass]

Good points Joe. I also note that this year, like last, the Vikings escape without having to play in a cold Lambeau. If you look at the Vikings schedule, they have a very comfortable late Nov. and Dec schedule with home games and a road dome game. Coincidence? It's a good thing I'm not a conspiracy theory guy, or I might be suspicious about this one....


I'm not a conspiracy theory guy, but I am WAY more than suspicious about this one.

But I digress and at the risk of getting one of those "thread jacked" emoticons accompanied by a quote, or worse yet be asked to move this to another thread - I'll save my 2 cents for another time and place.

But really - think about that for a while.

[CaptainKickass]

If ONE goes down?? Don't you mean if Lee, Blackman, and Harris goes down?? I admit, if you get to your 6th DB playing the nickel it gets ugly.

Hey I'm not the spelling police, or part of the grammar patrol but every time I see Blackmon misspelled Blackman - I get a strange vision of Will Blackmon himself wearing a mask over his eyes, underwear over his tights, sporting a flowing cape, with a giant capital "B" logo on his chest... standing in the end-zone with the ball as if he just scored a TD on a kick return.

Ok - so - I am weird. :crazy:

[packrulz]

I agree with the premise of the article, he needs to be more open minded to FA's, but it fails to mention the switch to the 3-4 defense, which I wasn't sure the Packers had the personnel to pull off, and in their first year they did pretty darn good. It also fails to mention TT has got the Packers in great shape with the salary cap, it was a mess when he got here.

[Fritz]

Good points, but I'm just not sure who the FA's were this year that Thompson was supposed to bring in.

I don't buy that Jason Taylor or Adalius Thomas are any better than Brad Jones at this point.

Trades are possible, but everybody here clamors to trade Colledge for an OLB. But if Colledge is as awful as many believe, what kind of OLB are you going to get for him?

Someone else mentioned the Jets trading a third for Cromartie. But who would you rather have on your roster: the third round pick of ours, Burnett, or Cromartie?

[ND72]

Good points, but I'm just not sure who the FA's were this year that Thompson was supposed to bring in.

I don't buy that Jason Taylor or Adalius Thomas are any better than Brad Jones at this point.

Trades are possible, but everybody here clamors to trade Colledge for an OLB. But if Colledge is as awful as many believe, what kind of OLB are you going to get for him?

Someone else mentioned the Jets trading a third for Cromartie. But who would you rather have on your roster: the third round pick of ours, Burnett, or Cromartie?


I agree 100% with this. There just wasn't that guy this year to bring in that would push us over the top. Yes, I would have liked Cromartie, but I'll take Burnett (hopefully). I am shocked we didn't draft any OLB or CB, but if I remember right, Teddy brought in some OLB's as UFA who a lot of people have said could be really good pick ups.

[ThunderDan]

The real change in cap space management now is:

All the teams know how to do it!

When do players of Reggie White, Kevin Greene, and Hardy Nickerson talent all come available in the same year now a days?

Deion Sanders was a free agent signing in both 94 by the 49ers and 95 by the Cowboys. And both teams by signing Sanders started down their own personal salary cap hell. By 1999 SF was $24 million over the cap.

The Cowboys resurgance was created by the H Walker trade to Minnesota where they got their core guys with all their draft picks that year. Dallas kept signing FA to keep supplementing the core and it eventually killed them. Look how long it took Dallas to get out of their late 90s early 00s cap situation and how their record reflected that.

[retailguy]

Good points, but I'm just not sure who the FA's were this year that Thompson was supposed to bring in.

I don't buy that Jason Taylor or Adalius Thomas are any better than Brad Jones at this point.

Trades are possible, but everybody here clamors to trade Colledge for an OLB. But if Colledge is as awful as many believe, what kind of OLB are you going to get for him?

Someone else mentioned the Jets trading a third for Cromartie. But who would you rather have on your roster: the third round pick of ours, Burnett, or Cromartie?

Fritz, I kind of agree with what you're saying about Taylor & Thomas, but what I have never understood is why we don't bring one of them to camp for competition at least. They could push Jones to improve faster, or if he stumbles to provide a stop gap until he's ready.

It doesn't make sense to load up on undrafted free agents who might develop into something 3 years from now. Don't get me wrong, we need those guys too, but do we need as many as he typically brings to camp?

Couldn't we take 3 or 4 positions that we're weak at, and bring in servicable guys too? Example - OL, OLB, and CB are frequently mentioned here as being weak links. He made the OL a big priority in the draft, but did nothing (or very little) at OLB. Isn't Taylor or Thomas better than a street free agent or perhaps the guys on our practice squad? Why do all the FA's have to start?

Can't they push for that role, once in a while? :huh:

[ThunderDan]

Good points, but I'm just not sure who the FA's were this year that Thompson was supposed to bring in.

I don't buy that Jason Taylor or Adalius Thomas are any better than Brad Jones at this point.

Trades are possible, but everybody here clamors to trade Colledge for an OLB. But if Colledge is as awful as many believe, what kind of OLB are you going to get for him?

Someone else mentioned the Jets trading a third for Cromartie. But who would you rather have on your roster: the third round pick of ours, Burnett, or Cromartie?

Fritz, I kind of agree with what you're saying about Taylor & Thomas, but what I have never understood is why we don't bring one of them to camp for competition at least. They could push Jones to improve faster, or if he stumbles to provide a stop gap until he's ready.

It doesn't make sense to load up on undrafted free agents who might develop into something 3 years from now. Don't get me wrong, we need those guys too, but do we need as many as he typically brings to camp?

Couldn't we take 3 or 4 positions that we're weak at, and bring in servicable guys too? Example - OL, OLB, and CB are frequently mentioned here as being weak links. He made the OL a big priority in the draft, but did nothing (or very little) at OLB. Isn't Taylor or Thomas better than a street free agent or perhaps the guys on our practice squad? Why do all the FA's have to start?

Can't they push for that role, once in a while? :huh:

Because Taylor got a 2 year $13 million contract, that is really a 1 year $3.75 million deal. And there is no way in hell Taylor goes to GB for twice as much.

Thomas was paid $2 million in 2009 but with his signing bonus it was a $6.4 million hit. He still wants to get paid.

I don't think TT or GB will pay around $4.0 million to get a guy just to add depth. At that price they have to start or be a considerable roll-player.

[hoosier]

Over the last two years Adalius Thomas has acquired a reputation for laziness. If he can't get motivated to play for Belichick and Pats then why on earth would the Packers think things would work out any better in Green Bay? I don't think Thomas has been or should be a serious consideration. Taylor, on the other hand, might have been able to add something if he could have been convinced to sign with GB. But could he be swayed to come to GB to play on the strong side, which as far as I know he has never played before? And could he do it effectively? If not, do you really want to remove CM from his most natural position and force him to learn a new one--and probably for just one year? Taylor sounds nice at first but in the end I think there are too many variables in that equation and without knowing what his frame of mind is it is impossible to criticize TT for not going after him. Good point about Cromartie, too: if acquiring him would have meant trading this year's #3 and losing out on Burnett, that trade is not looking so good when seen through the rear view mirror!

[MichiganPackerFan]

The article fails to mention the contributions of:

Craig Newsome, 1st round pick of the 1995 draft as well as starting corner, circus-catch-interception-maker, and fumble-forcer of Superbowl XXXI.

William Henderson, 3rd round pick of the 1995 draft as well as starting fullback of Superbowl XXXI who would go on to become a probowler.

Antonio Freeman, 3rd round pick of the 1995 NFL draft as well as starting WR and go-ahead-record-length-touchdown-catcher of Superbowl XXXI. He'd also made numberous plays in the playoffs as a rookie and would go on to be a probowler and receive phat lewt contract after which he never tried again--still a great draft pick though.

Travis Jervey, 5th round selection in the 1995 draft who would later go to the Probowl with the Packers for his exceptional contributions on kick coverage.

Adam Timmerman, 7th round pick in the 1995 draft and starting right guard of Super Bowl XXXI who would later become a two time probowler.

These guys had as much to do with the magical free agent signings of the '95 offseason and if there's anything we can learn from this its that it doesn't matter where the players come from.

I just reviewed the 1995 draft. Wow, that was a really good one!

(does anyone know how to put this in a chart?)

Year(s) Round Pick Position, Name, School
1995 1 22 (to Carolina Panthers in draft-day trade)
1. 1995 1 32 CB Craig Newsome, Arizona State
(from Carolina Panthers in draft-day trade)
1995 2 53 (to Miami in Keith Jackson/Mark Ingram trades)
2. 1995 3a 65 DT Darius Holland, Colorado
(from Carolina Panthers in draft-day trade)
3. 1995 3b 66 FB William Henderson, North Carolina
(from Jacksonville Jaguars in Mark Brunell trade)
4. 1995 3c 73 LB Brian Williams, Southern California
(from Seattle Seahawks for RFA Corey Harris)
1995 3 84 (to Cleveland Browns in draft-day trade)
5. 1995 3d 90 WR Antonio Freeman, Virginia Tech
(from Cleveland Browns in draft-day trade)
6. 1995 4 117 T Jeff Miller, Mississippi
1995 5 152 (to Los Angeles Raiders in Charles Jordan trade)
7. 1995 5a 160 QB Jay Barker, Alabama
(from Cleveland Browns in draft-day trade)
8. 1995 5b 170 RB Travis Jervey, The Citadel
(from Jacksonville Jaguars in Mark Brunell trade)
9. 1995 6 173 WR Charlie Simmons, Georgia Tech
(from Carolina Panthers in draft-day trade)
1995 6 188 (to Carolina Panthers in draft-day trade)
10. 1995 7 230 G Adam Timmerman, South Dakota State

[sharpe1027]

Why is it that many of these arguments seem to suggest that Veteran talent must come through FA rather than internally? Do players only become Veterans if they change teams? :lol:

[Pugger]

And just because a player with a recognizable name becomes a FA is this guy automatically better than any of our players already on the roster? :roll: Obviously TT and company think of the players currently on our roster in higher regard than some of the folks on all of these online message boards I read.

[Bretsky]

silly free agency; the players on our roster are always better than anything out there so why waste time looking there to improve our roster depth from anywhere but our own

[Lurker64]

silly free agency; the players on our roster are always better than anything out there so why waste time looking there to improve our roster depth from anywhere but our own

Well... this is obviously an overstatement intended sarcastically. But the thing is, being GM of an NFL team would be significantly easier if you could see the future. The thing is, none of the GMs are effective augurs, so they're all just making informed guesses. You never know how much better a young guy is going to be than the year before, and likewise you never know how good a potential free agent "upgrade" is going to be for your team. Flash back one year ago before OTAs, nobody knew how good Jermichael Finley was going to be as he had a pretty underwhelming rookie campaign, but he obviously turned out pretty well. Back up a few months further, and people were bemoaning Thompson's inability to sign either Canty or Olshansky which supposedly left the DL in shambles, but none of us knew how good Johnny Jolly was going to be at the 5-technique position.

The thing is though, that improving from within essentially costs you nothing extra, so it's always a good idea to at least try to do that; while improving from without can potentially be very expensive, so it's not always worth it. I won't say that there's never a way to improve via free agency, but I am firmly of the mind that it's almost never a good idea to overpay for a free agent from another team. Thompson has a good method, he sets a price he's willing to pay for a free agent and never exceeds it by much. In recent years we've seen some relatively mediocre players command crazy money simply because they're "the best at their position" in a given year and the team that signed him perceived a "need" at that position.

So as much as Thompson has sat out free agency to this point, I don't think he really has a lot of misses. Sometimes not signing somebody can be the right decision (e.g. it would have been a waste if Thompson signed LaVarr Arrington).

[Fritz]

What he said.

Again: Whom would you all have wanted TT to sign? Jason Taylor - then move your rookie of the year from last year to a new side? Adalius Thomas - whom the Pats did not want?

[bobblehead]

silly free agency; the players on our roster are always better than anything out there so why waste time looking there to improve our roster depth from anywhere but our own

TT has been very active in FA when it doesn't cost him big garaunteed money to do so. Pickett, Woodson, Chillar, not to mention all the young guys like TWill, Bigby, and such. Some work out and some get cut without costing us anything (Klemm).

What he won't do is commit big dollars to a guy who might not be worth much anymore. He also won't spend HUGE dollars for a guy like Haynesworth who has a history of being lazy, or trade away the future for a guy like JAllen who he would then have to pay huge as well.

[RashanGary]

We'll see how it all plays out. I think we can win a championship or three doing it just the way we are.

I think this year and the next several years are going to be some of the best in Packer history.

[Deputy Nutz]

I can see the kool-aid is flowing.

Until someone tells me how the Packers got significantly better in defending the pass in the off season I ain't betting on them to win no Super Bowl.

Listening to some of ya, why don't we just build a statue of Thompson out front of Lambeau and put him right between Curly and Vince.

[ND72]

Until someone tells me how the Packers got significantly better in defending the pass in the off season I ain't betting on them to win no Super Bowl.



You'd be surprised how much improvement happens from an offseason of work and game-film watching.

[Joemailman]

I can see the kool-aid is flowing.

Until someone tells me how the Packers got significantly better in defending the pass in the off season I ain't betting on them to win no Super Bowl.

Maybe they won't lose 3 CB's this year to season ending injuries.

Maybe Underwood, a very talented player, will be better than he was as a rookie. Brad Jones too.

Maybe Capers will gameplan to stop Favre as much as he did to stop AP.

Maybe Josh Bell will be better now that he will have some time to learn the defense.

Maybe Morgan Burnett will be a better backup to Bigby than Derrick Martin.

Maybe everybody will be a little better in the 2nd year of this defense.


Vinnie Iyer of the Sporting News likes the Packers as one of the top teams in the league with staying power:

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/article/2010-05-14/49ers-top-list-emerging-teams-staying-power


http://www.churchofglobalwarming.com/images/green-kool-aidman.jpg

[falco]

TT has been very active in FA when it doesn't cost him big garaunteed money to do so. Pickett, Woodson, Chillar, not to mention all the young guys like TWill, Bigby, and such. Some work out and some get cut without costing us anything (Klemm).

What he won't do is commit big dollars to a guy who might not be worth much anymore. He also won't spend HUGE dollars for a guy like Haynesworth who has a history of being lazy, or trade away the future for a guy like JAllen who he would then have to pay huge as well.

+1

[RashanGary]

I think there is a good chance Neal is a solid addition to our DL group. Last year, we were playing Montgomery and the rookie version of Jarius Wynn when Raji went down. This year, we should be able to absorb at least one injury on the DL without the drop off we had last year.

Tramon, Chuck, Collins, Bigby, Underwood, Harris and Bell are all in their 2nd year in the defense. Underwood and Bell both have a chance to be solid nickle players, although I would have felt a lot better with some new blood in there. Burnett is an exciting addition to the secondary.

Matthews is in his 2nd year. Jones is in his 2nd year. Both should be more assignment sure, stronger, and have better technique rushing the passer.

Capers will work hard to clean up some of last years confusion and he has great teaching tape to work with now.



And then the offense. . . They look to be better up front, Grant is showing no signs of falling off. Rodgers is just at that point where he's in his physical prime and had just enough seasoning to be really comfortable out there.


ST's can't be worse.


I like our chances. I think the Packers are elite this year.

[Bretsky]

What he said.

Again: Whom would you all have wanted TT to sign? Jason Taylor - then move your rookie of the year from last year to a new side? Adalius Thomas - whom the Pats did not want?


This is always the convenient argument. Do we have anybody out there better than guys like Bush or Breno the Italian Stallion ? Every year there are guys that can help us; the question is whether it's a good risk reward ratio.

And then cup that along with how do we know they were better than what we have. After all, guys like Chris Hope would have been no better than Jarrett Bush and no way he makes a difference a few years back

And then even if there were better players who is to say they'd have come to Green Bay ? To some the solution is just never to question because we're just a bunch of online yahoos. I'll never buy into that.

Lots of ways to skin a cat

[falco]

the question is whether it's a good risk reward ratio

This is a good point. No one else wanted to take a risk on Woodson (other than the Bucs I think).

I would be interested to see a list of all the great FA signings in the time sign TT has been here. I can't think of many offhand that made a big difference.

Off the top of my head, Michael Turner had a good first year in ATL; he was less than stellar last year, but I think he could have been good for GB.

[Pugger]

I can see the kool-aid is flowing.

Until someone tells me how the Packers got significantly better in defending the pass in the off season I ain't betting on them to win no Super Bowl.

Listening to some of ya, why don't we just build a statue of Thompson out front of Lambeau and put him right between Curly and Vince.

Your sarcasm is showing. No one here is declaring TT the second coming of Curly or Vince. :roll:

Do you not think adding Neal and Wilson to the D line will improve our pass rush? Or do you believe the pass rush comes mostly from the OLBers in Capers' scheme?

[Tarlam!]

Do we have anybody out there better than () Breno the Italian Stallion

Breno is, in fact, Brazilian. I know I'm splitting hairs....

Fans get to see some training camp, but we don't get 7/8ths of the info that TT and coaches get. If they cut guys like Breno or Harrell, then call them busts.

Every GM has a list of draft pick busts. The lengths of those lists are obviously a variable and it would be interesting to compare by team and GM how long each list actually is. I have a sneaking suspician that many would be surprised at TT's non bust list compared to most other teams/GMs.

TT is very sensitive to the overall status of the locker room; bringing in high profile FAs is a huge risk in more ways than just boom or bust for the player. Money comes into it and nothing is potentially more explosive for a locker room than a highly paid FA coming in. Jealousy is a curse, but it's a natural human trait.

Woodon and Pickett, even Chillar and Grant(I know, he was traded for, but he belongs in this discussion) have been largely successful because the big bucks they did get had to be earned (incentives, playing time etc.). It's the standard TT style contract. Unproven FAs don't get a heck of a lot in guarantees.

Does anybody here think a brand like Julious Peppers was going to a contract like TT's when teams like Da Bears are prepared to open the safe in guaranteed money?

I suggest TT's motivation is team balance, value and locker room fit.

[bobblehead]

I can see the kool-aid is flowing.

Until someone tells me how the Packers got significantly better in defending the pass in the off season I ain't betting on them to win no Super Bowl.

Maybe they won't lose 3 CB's this year to season ending injuries.

Maybe Underwood, a very talented player, will be better than he was as a rookie. Brad Jones too.

Maybe Capers will gameplan to stop Favre as much as he did to stop AP.

Maybe Josh Bell will be better now that he will have some time to learn the defense.

Maybe Morgan Burnett will be a better backup to Bigby than Derrick Martin.

Maybe everybody will be a little better in the 2nd year of this defense.


Vinnie Iyer of the Sporting News likes the Packers as one of the top teams in the league with staying power:

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/article/2010-05-14/49ers-top-list-emerging-teams-staying-power


http://www.churchofglobalwarming.com/images/green-kool-aidman.jpg

thats a lot of maybes....and only one or two have to happen to make our pass D better. Simply having Harris back and giving BJones an offseason of pro work will help immensly I would think.....never mind the other 2 season ending injuries that could have kept bush off the field.

[packrulz]

Actually, Ron Wolf was a better drafter in mid to late rounds, he had some misses in the first round, like Jamal Reynolds, T-Buck, Cletius Hunt, & John Michels, but hiring Holmgren and his staff, trading for Favre, and signing Reggie White made the Packers Super Bowl caliber. TT doesn't have any Reggie White's to go after, but Pickett, Woodson, and Chilliar were nice pickups. Looking at the drafts, I like who TT has drafted so far.

Ron Wolf's drafts:
1991 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 19 Vinnie Clark CB Ohio State
2 35 Esera Tuaolo NT Oregon State
3 67 Don Davey DE Wisconsin
3 81 Chuck Webb FB Tennessee
5 135 Jeff Fite -- Memphis
6 149 Walter Dean RB Grambling State
6 164 Joe Garten C Colorado
7 169 Frank Blevins -- Oklahoma
7 176 Reggie Burnette LB Houston
8 203 Johnnie Walker -- Texas
9 229 Dean Witkowski -- North Dakota
10 262 Rapier Porter -- Arkansas-Pine Bluff
11 289 J.J. Wierenga -- Central Michigan
12 316 Linzy Collins -- Missouri
1992 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 5 Terrell Buckley CB Florida State
2 34 Mark D'Onofrio LB Penn State
3 62 Robert Brooks WR South Carolina
4 103 Edgar Bennett RB Florida State
5 119 Dexter McNabb FB Florida
5 130 Orlando McKay WR Washington
6 157 Mark Chmura TE Boston College
7 190 Chris Holder -- Tuskegee
9 230 Ty Detmer QB Brigham Young
9 240 Shazzon Bradley -- Tennessee
10 257 Andrew Oberg -- North Carolina
11 287 Gabe Mokwuah -- American International
12 314 Brett Collins LB Washington
1993 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 15 Wayne Simmons OLB Clemson
1 29 George Teague FS Alabama
3 81 Earl Dotson T Texas A&M - Kingsville
5 118 Mark Brunell QB Washington
5 119 James Willis LB Auburn
6 141 Doug Evans CB Louisiana Tech
6 152 Paul Hutchins T Western Michigan
6 156 Tim Watson DB Howard
7 183 Bob Kuberski NT Navy
1994 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 16 Aaron Taylor G Notre Dame
3 84 LeShon Johnson RB Northern Illinois
4 126 Gabe Wilkins DE Gardner-Webb
5 146 Terry Mickens WR Florida A&M
5 149 Dorsey Levens RB Georgia Tech
6 169 Jay Kearney -- West Virginia
6 175 Ruffin Hamilton LB Tulane
6 181 Bill Schroeder WR Wis.-La Crosse
6 190 Paul Duckworth -- Connecticut
1995 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 32 Craig Newsome CB Arizona State
3 65 Darius Holland DT Colorado
3 66 William Henderson RB North Carolina
3 73 Brian Williams LB USC
3 90 Antonio Freeman WR Virginia Tech
4 117 Jeff Miller T Mississippi
5 160 Jay Barker QB Alabama
5 170 Travis Jervey RB The Citadel
6 173 Charlie Simmons -- Georgia Tech
7 230 Adam Timmerman G South Dakota State
1996 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 27 John Michels T USC
2 56 Derrick Mayes WR Notre Dame
3 90 Mike Flanagan C UCLA
3 93 Tyrone Williams DB Nebraska
4 123 Chris Darkins RB Minnesota
6 208 Marco Rivera G Penn State
7 240 Kyle Wachholtz QB USC
7 252 Keith McKenzie DE Ball State
1997 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 30 Ross Verba T Iowa
2 60 Darren Sharper DB William & Mary
3 90 Brett Conway K Penn State
4 126 Jermaine Smith DT Georgia
5 160 Anthony Hicks LB Arkansas
7 213 Chris Miller -- USC
7 231 Jerald Sowell RB Tulane
7 240 Ronnie McAda -- Army
1998 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 19 Vonnie Holliday DE North Carolina
3 90 Jonathan Brown DE Tennessee
4 121 Roosevelt Blackmon CB Morris Brown
5 150 Corey Bradford WR Jackson State
6 156 Scott McGarrahan DB New Mexico
6 187 Matt Hasselbeck QB Boston College
7 218 Edwin Watson RB Purdue
Supplemental Draft: Mike Wahle G Navy
1999 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 25 Antuan Edwards CB Clemson
2 47 Fred Vinson CB Vanderbilt
3 87 Mike McKenzie CB Memphis
3 94 Cletidus Hunt DE Kentucky State
4 131 Aaron Brooks QB Virginia
4 133 Josh Bidwell P Oregon
5 159 De'Mond Parker RB Oklahoma
5 163 Craig Heimburger C Missouri
6 196 Dee Miller -- Ohio State
6 203 Scott Curry T Montana
7 212 Chris Akins DB Arkansas-Pine Bluff
7 213 Donald Driver WR Alcorn State
2000 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 14 Bubba Franks TE Miami (Fla.)
2 44 Chad Clifton T Tennessee
3 74 Steve Warren DT Nebraska
4 98 Na'il Diggs OLB Ohio State
4 114 Anthony Lucas WR Arkansas
4 126 Gary Berry SAF Ohio State
5 149 Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila DE San Diego State
5 151 Joey Jamison -- Texas Southern
7 224 Mark Tauscher T Wisconsin
7 229 Ron Moore DE Northwestern Oklahoma State
7 242 Charles Lee WR Central Florida
7 249 Eugene McCaslin LB Florida
7 252 Rondell Mealey RB Louisiana State
2001 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 10 Jamal Reynolds DE Florida State
2 41 Robert Ferguson WR Texas A&M
3 71 Bhawoh Jue SS Penn State
3 72 Torrance Marshall LB Oklahoma
4 105 Bill Ferrario G Wisconsin
6 198 David Martin TE Tennessee
TT's drafts:
2005 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 24 Aaron Rodgers QB California
2 51 Nick Collins FS Bethune-Cookman
2 58 Terrence Murphy WR Texas A&M
4 115 Marviel Underwood DB San Diego State
4 125 Brady Poppinga LB Brigham Young
5 143 Junius Coston C North Carolina A&T
5 167 Mike Hawkins DB Oklahoma
6 180 Mike Montgomery DT Texas A&M
6 195 Craig Bragg WR UCLA
7 245 Kurt Campbell CB Albany State (NY)
7 246 Will Whitticker G Michigan State
2006 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 5 A.J. Hawk OLB Ohio State
2 47 Daryn Colledge G Boise State
2 52 Greg Jennings WR Western Michigan
3 67 Abdul Hodge LB Iowa
3 75 Jason Spitz G Louisville
4 104 Cory Rodgers WR Texas Christian
4 115 Will Blackmon CB Boston College
5 148 Ingle Martin QB Furman
5 165 Tony Moll G Nevada-Reno
6 183 Johnny Jolly DT Texas A&M
6 185 Tyrone Culver DB Fresno State
7 253 Dave Tollefson DE Northwest Missouri State
2007 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 16 Justin Harrell DT Tennessee
2 63 Brandon Jackson RB Nebraska
3 78 James Jones WR San Jose State
3 89 Aaron Rouse SAF Virginia Tech
4 119 Allen Barbre G Missouri Southern State
5 157 David Clowney WR Virginia Tech
6 191 Korey Hall FB Boise State
6 192 Desmond Bishop LB California
6 193 Mason Crosby K Colorado
7 228 DeShawn Wynn RB Florida
7 243 Clark Harris TE Rutgers
Traded future 6th round pick for Ryan Grant RB Notre Dame
2008 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
2 36 Jordy Nelson WR Kansas State
2 56 Brian Brohm QB Louisville
2 60 Pat Lee CB Auburn
3 91 Jermichael Finley TE Texas
4 102 Jeremy Thompson DE Wake Forest
4 135 Josh Sitton G Central Florida
5 150 Breno Giacomini T Louisville
7 209 Matt Flynn QB Louisiana State
7 217 Brett Swain WR San Diego State
2009 - Green Bay Packers
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 9 B.J. Raji NT Boston College
1 26 Clay Matthews LB USC
4 109 T.J. Lang T Eastern Michigan
5 145 Quinn Johnson RB Louisiana State
5 162 Jamon Meredith T South Carolina
6 182 Jarius Wynn DE Georgia
6 187 Brandon Underwood DB Cincinnati
7 218 Brad Jones LB Colorado
2010 - Green Bay Packer 1 23 (23) Bryan Bulaga OT 6'5" 314 Iowa
2 24 (56) Mike Neal DT 6'3" 294 Purdue
3 7 (71) (From Browns through Eagles) Morgan Burnett SS 6'1" 209 Georgia Tech
5 23 (154) Andrew Quarless TE 6'4" 254 Penn State
5 38 (169) (Compensatory selection) Marshall Newhouse OT 6'4" 319 TCU
6 24 (193) James Starks RB 6'2" 218 Buffalo
7 23 (230) C.J. Wilson DE 6'3" 290 East Carolina[/b]

[retailguy]

Your sarcasm is showing. No one here is declaring TT the second coming of Curly or Vince. :roll:



Bullshit. Some of these guys have the statue pre-made in their garage.

[RashanGary]

I'll admit, I'm drinkin the TT koolaid. I think he's got something pretty special going here.

[Deputy Nutz]

I can see the kool-aid is flowing.

Until someone tells me how the Packers got significantly better in defending the pass in the off season I ain't betting on them to win no Super Bowl.

Listening to some of ya, why don't we just build a statue of Thompson out front of Lambeau and put him right between Curly and Vince.

Your sarcasm is showing. No one here is declaring TT the second coming of Curly or Vince. :roll:

Do you not think adding Neal and Wilson to the D line will improve our pass rush? Or do you believe the pass rush comes mostly from the OLBers in Capers' scheme?

For one, getting any significant contribution from a rookies is fantastic, but I try not to count on that when talking in terms of team development for the upcoming year. Pressure on the QB in the 3-4 comes from the scheme, most of the time the OLBs are getting the pressures, but it also comes from the ILBs and also here and there from the defensive line. It is the scheme.

I didn't see enough from Brad Jones in his rookie year to lead me to believe that he is going be game changer, some one that makes a difference in the out come of the ball game. He is an ok option going into the 2010 season, but I wouldn't expect 7 or more sacks from him.

I unlike some in Packernation, liked the Neal pick. If you can get a solid defensive, or offensive lineman regardless of team need or round, you make the pick. Everything starts with the offensive and defensive line. Pittsburgh has linebackers that were basically street free agents and lower draft picks, but they blow up in the Pitt scheme because the Steelers have or had three really good defensive linemen that ran the scheme to perfection.

I don't think Cullen Jenkins fits the scheme anymore than Aaron Kampman did playing linebacker. Jenkins comes off as a me player, and playing end in a three four defense might not be his cup of tea.

Raji is a penatrator and would have been best suited as a disruptive three tech tackle in a one gap scheme. He will be all right because he is a good football player, but I don't know if he is best utilized in 3-4. So adding guys like Neal makes sense when you break it down, also Jenkins contract is up in 2011, and Jolly is probably going to face league suspension when all is said and done.

Thompson, apparently has the team pointed in the right direction. I hate the man, but I also am not one to claim he isn't doing enough in free agency. Free Agency sucks, not a lot out there. What I will critique him on is that he won't make trades for players that could put this team over the top, he looks at very little in terms of veteran talent that could put this team over the edge.

Woodson and Pickett have been great additions, but that was almost 5 years ago, so the question is, "what have you done lately"?

[LP]

I hate the man

Why is that? What exactly did he do to you?

[falco]

Your sarcasm is showing. No one here is declaring TT the second coming of Curly or Vince. :roll:



Bullshit. Some of these guys have the statue pre-made in their garage.

Like who? :?:

[Tarlam!]

This article sheds some interesting facts on the performance of rookie pass rushers

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d818130b7&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true


Want to predict which rookies will be busts? Look at pass rushers
By Pat Kirwan | NFL.com

What is the realistic level of sack production that a fan can hope for from a rookie pass rusher? It's definitely not the 10 by Matthews or the 11 by Orakpo.

Try a more realistic number like three or fewer. There have only been three rookie pass rushers to reach double-digit sacks from the first or second round since '06. Don't expect many more tackles, either, as most average in the mid-20s their rookie season.

[Lurker64]

This article sheds some interesting facts on the performance of rookie pass rushers

Pass-rusher is a position that is absolutely littered with busts. It's not perceived as a high risk position as much as WR, since WR busts tend to find themselves out of the league (Charles Rogers) or traded away for peanuts (Troy Williamson) quickly, while pass rusher busts tend to simply end up as rotation players or average starters (Chris Long, Tamba Hali).

It's generally most prudent to not swing for the fences with a pass rusher unless that's a need that really, desperately, outweighs everything else, there's a tremendous value at that position, or there's a guy who you are supremely confident in working out. Like even the best hitters in baseball, you'll strike out (Vernon Gholston) more often than you hit a home run (Brian Orakpo), and you'll probably hit more soft grounders to short (Quentin Groves) than bloop singles (Tamba Hali).

I give a lot of credit to TT for finding one guy who seems to be excellent and another guy who seems to be good enough. Would I like another difference maker? Absolutely, but it's not necessarily a great idea to expend all the bullets in your gun trying to hit that one guy. There's lots of ways to make a good defense. The Jets didn't have much in the way of elite pass rushing OLBs last year, but they certainly were good enough on defense.

[Deputy Nutz]

I hate the man

Why is that? What exactly did he do to you?

He stole my self respect

[falco]

He stole my self respect

Any you noticed it was missing ?!?!?

[Fritz]

What he said.

Again: Whom would you all have wanted TT to sign? Jason Taylor - then move your rookie of the year from last year to a new side? Adalius Thomas - whom the Pats did not want?


This is always the convenient argument. Do we have anybody out there better than guys like Bush or Breno the Italian Stallion ? Every year there are guys that can help us; the question is whether it's a good risk reward ratio.

And then cup that along with how do we know they were better than what we have. After all, guys like Chris Hope would have been no better than Jarrett Bush and no way he makes a difference a few years back

And then even if there were better players who is to say they'd have come to Green Bay ? To some the solution is just never to question because we're just a bunch of online yahoos. I'll never buy into that.

Lots of ways to skin a cat

It's not a "convenient argument." It's asking you - or anyone who thinks TT should've signed a free agent - to say who that free agent is, and why you think that FA would be an improvement on Brad Jones on Brandon Underwood.

So, do you think it would've been worth the risk to bring in Jason Taylor and ask CMIII to switch sides? What indicators do you think suggest A. Thomas would be productive this year? Which d-back would be better than Brandon Underwood?

I'm asking for names and reasons they'd be improvements. I'm not unwilling to listen.

[pbmax]

Your sarcasm is showing. No one here is declaring TT the second coming of Curly or Vince. :roll:



Bullshit. Some of these guys have the statue pre-made in their garage.
Its not a statue. Its a bust!

:rs:

[retailguy]

It's not a "convenient argument." It's asking you - or anyone who thinks TT should've signed a free agent - to say who that free agent is, and why you think that FA would be an improvement on Brad Jones on Brandon Underwood.

So, do you think it would've been worth the risk to bring in Jason Taylor and ask CMIII to switch sides? What indicators do you think suggest A. Thomas would be productive this year? Which d-back would be better than Brandon Underwood?

I'm asking for names and reasons they'd be improvements. I'm not unwilling to listen.

Fritz, I think it is a convenient argument too. Help doesn't just have to come from starters, it can come from more solid backup folks too.

I don't have to "name names" to know that there is better depth out there than the depth we have at cornerback. There is better depth out there than what we had on the OL, though there is little room with two promising youngsters. How about depth at OLB? Nobody is better than what we have? Really?

I just don't buy it, when we're bringing in undrafted folks to "see" if they might help 3 years from now.

The whole "name names" crap is just that, crap. There are always folks out there who are better than what you have. If it's a priority you plug them in, if it isn't, you pass. We typically pass, and that's how we had a 7th round draft pick starting at OLB last season after our starter went down (he played well, but got exposed along with the rest of the defense in the playoff game), and it is also one of the many reasons that our OL was so abysmal in the first half of the year.

We passed, relied on the young guys, and paid a price for that. The OL probably made the difference between the wild card and a division title. In the end, did it make a difference? Who knows, but to say because we didn't "name names" we're wrong is ridiculous.

[retailguy]

Your sarcasm is showing. No one here is declaring TT the second coming of Curly or Vince. :roll:



Bullshit. Some of these guys have the statue pre-made in their garage.
Its not a statue. Its a bust!

:rs:

Good one! I'll pay more attention to that in the future. :P

[Pugger]

It's not a "convenient argument." It's asking you - or anyone who thinks TT should've signed a free agent - to say who that free agent is, and why you think that FA would be an improvement on Brad Jones on Brandon Underwood.

So, do you think it would've been worth the risk to bring in Jason Taylor and ask CMIII to switch sides? What indicators do you think suggest A. Thomas would be productive this year? Which d-back would be better than Brandon Underwood?

I'm asking for names and reasons they'd be improvements. I'm not unwilling to listen.

Fritz, I think it is a convenient argument too. Help doesn't just have to come from starters, it can come from more solid backup folks too.

I don't have to "name names" to know that there is better depth out there than the depth we have at cornerback. There is better depth out there than what we had on the OL, though there is little room with two promising youngsters. How about depth at OLB? Nobody is better than what we have? Really?

I just don't buy it, when we're bringing in undrafted folks to "see" if they might help 3 years from now.

The whole "name names" crap is just that, crap. There are always folks out there who are better than what you have. If it's a priority you plug them in, if it isn't, you pass. We typically pass, and that's how we had a 7th round draft pick starting at OLB last season after our starter went down (he played well, but got exposed along with the rest of the defense in the playoff game), and it is also one of the many reasons that our OL was so abysmal in the first half of the year.

We passed, relied on the young guys, and paid a price for that. The OL probably made the difference between the wild card and a division title. In the end, did it make a difference? Who knows, but to say because we didn't "name names" we're wrong is ridiculous.

You may be right and TT should have went after a FA this spring but I can't think of a OLB or CB that was available that was appreciably better than what we already have on the roster :?: .

[Fritz]

It's not a "convenient argument." It's asking you - or anyone who thinks TT should've signed a free agent - to say who that free agent is, and why you think that FA would be an improvement on Brad Jones on Brandon Underwood.

So, do you think it would've been worth the risk to bring in Jason Taylor and ask CMIII to switch sides? What indicators do you think suggest A. Thomas would be productive this year? Which d-back would be better than Brandon Underwood?

I'm asking for names and reasons they'd be improvements. I'm not unwilling to listen.

Fritz, I think it is a convenient argument too. Help doesn't just have to come from starters, it can come from more solid backup folks too.

I don't have to "name names" to know that there is better depth out there than the depth we have at cornerback. There is better depth out there than what we had on the OL, though there is little room with two promising youngsters. How about depth at OLB? Nobody is better than what we have? Really?

I just don't buy it, when we're bringing in undrafted folks to "see" if they might help 3 years from now.

The whole "name names" crap is just that, crap. There are always folks out there who are better than what you have. If it's a priority you plug them in, if it isn't, you pass. We typically pass, and that's how we had a 7th round draft pick starting at OLB last season after our starter went down (he played well, but got exposed along with the rest of the defense in the playoff game), and it is also one of the many reasons that our OL was so abysmal in the first half of the year.

We passed, relied on the young guys, and paid a price for that. The OL probably made the difference between the wild card and a division title. In the end, did it make a difference? Who knows, but to say because we didn't "name names" we're wrong is ridiculous.

Asking people to provide evidence and explanation is "crap"?

I'm willing to listen. But saying it's crap to have to offer examples and arguments is....crap. If you're unwilling to provide evidence then how can anybody convince anyone of anything?

[retailguy]

Asking people to provide evidence and explanation is "crap"?

I'm willing to listen. But saying it's crap to have to offer examples and arguments is....crap. If you're unwilling to provide evidence then how can anybody convince anyone of anything?

So, what you're really saying is that nobody is better? Here is the old trick, where you get someone to "name a name", then you come up with 20 reasons why that person wouldn't work out. It's simple and it ignores the real point.

The last several years there have been players that are better than what we have. We have purposely chosen to stand pat and not bring in those players.

It is reasonable to conclude that we could have improved depth at certain given positions without risking the cap, the finacial well being of the organization, the the overall "plan" of the organization.

Wolf used to tell players all the time - "You're good enough until I find somebody better". Shouldn't Jarrett Bush be hearing that, and further, facing competition other than a rookie FA?


You may be right and TT should have went after a FA this spring but I can't think of a OLB or CB that was available that was appreciably better than what we already have on the roster .


So you are really maintaining that there are no players available that would have provided an immediate upgrade to Jarrett Bush, Josh Bell, Will Blackmon, Brady Poppinga, Cyril Obizor, and Desmond Bishop. Really?

The majority of these players have been around for several offseasons. So, say, in the past three years, NONE of them were replacable? (I ignored the OL, which would have produced another 4 or 5 names over the last 3 years). In fact, we were so enamored with our LB depth that we elected to start a 7th round rookie over the "experienced" backups we had.... and no FA is better? :shock:

Is that what you two are maintaining? That's the opposite side of the argument of "name me a name"....

[mraynrand]

It's not a "convenient argument." It's asking you - or anyone who thinks TT should've signed a free agent - to say who that free agent is, and why you think that FA would be an improvement on Brad Jones on Brandon Underwood.

So, do you think it would've been worth the risk to bring in Jason Taylor and ask CMIII to switch sides? What indicators do you think suggest A. Thomas would be productive this year? Which d-back would be better than Brandon Underwood?

I'm asking for names and reasons they'd be improvements. I'm not unwilling to listen.

Fritz, I think it is a convenient argument too. Help doesn't just have to come from starters, it can come from more solid backup folks too.

I don't have to "name names" to know that there is better depth out there than the depth we have at cornerback. There is better depth out there than what we had on the OL, though there is little room with two promising youngsters. How about depth at OLB? Nobody is better than what we have? Really?

I just don't buy it, when we're bringing in undrafted folks to "see" if they might help 3 years from now.

The whole "name names" crap is just that, crap. There are always folks out there who are better than what you have. If it's a priority you plug them in, if it isn't, you pass. We typically pass, and that's how we had a 7th round draft pick starting at OLB last season after our starter went down (he played well, but got exposed along with the rest of the defense in the playoff game), and it is also one of the many reasons that our OL was so abysmal in the first half of the year.

We passed, relied on the young guys, and paid a price for that. The OL probably made the difference between the wild card and a division title. In the end, did it make a difference? Who knows, but to say because we didn't "name names" we're wrong is ridiculous.

Asking people to provide evidence and explanation is "crap"?

I'm willing to listen. But saying it's crap to have to offer examples and arguments is....crap. If you're unwilling to provide evidence then how can anybody convince anyone of anything?

Hear, Hear! Retail, Fritz has you dead to rights. If you are making the argument that TT could and should be doing more to improve the situation at CB or OL, then you are obligated to provide some sort of strategy he should follow. Who are the prospects he could get? Should he trade someone on the roster to get a CB or OLineman? If so who? If you don't have a plan, then you should limit yourself to "TT needs to do better to win a superbowl." Then your either right or wrong based on whether they win it all this year. As it currently stands, all you are doing is complaining.

[retailguy]

Hear, Hear! Retail, Fritz has you dead to rights. If you are making the argument that TT could and should be doing more to improve the situation at CB or OL, then you are obligated to provide some sort of strategy he should follow. Who are the prospects he could get? Should he trade someone on the roster to get a CB or OLineman? If so who? If you don't have a plan, then you should limit yourself to "TT needs to do better to win a superbowl." Then your either right or wrong based on whether they win it all this year. As it currently stands, all you are doing is complaining.

I know you haven't been around much, but I did what you're asking in THIS VERY THREAD. Go back and read the lovely responses.... I'm making the point that naming names doesn't work because of that... all you get is a bunch of excuses as to "why that won't work". What it all means is that there "is nobody better than what we have". That's my point.

Thanks for sharing.

[MichiganPackerFan]

I agree that the bottom of the roster (ie "depth") could certainly be improved. I cant imagine that there is NOT a player available who is the same cost as bush with at least equivalent skills and more upside. I am not a scout and I dont know the league's personnel well enough to name specif names, but logic leads me to believe that there has to be SOMEONE or more than someone who is better. Just because TT hasn't identified those players yet, does not mean he won't make some changes when he identifies them.

I personally love how TT has built the team and developed youth. SOOO much better than the sherman years where he continuously reached for talent, sacrificing picks and the future. The only question now, is can he take a shot at winning without completely devastating the future.

[Joemailman]

It's not a "convenient argument." It's asking you - or anyone who thinks TT should've signed a free agent - to say who that free agent is, and why you think that FA would be an improvement on Brad Jones on Brandon Underwood.

So, do you think it would've been worth the risk to bring in Jason Taylor and ask CMIII to switch sides? What indicators do you think suggest A. Thomas would be productive this year? Which d-back would be better than Brandon Underwood?

I'm asking for names and reasons they'd be improvements. I'm not unwilling to listen.

Fritz, I think it is a convenient argument too. Help doesn't just have to come from starters, it can come from more solid backup folks too.

I don't have to "name names" to know that there is better depth out there than the depth we have at cornerback. There is better depth out there than what we had on the OL, though there is little room with two promising youngsters. How about depth at OLB? Nobody is better than what we have? Really?

I just don't buy it, when we're bringing in undrafted folks to "see" if they might help 3 years from now.

The whole "name names" crap is just that, crap. There are always folks out there who are better than what you have. If it's a priority you plug them in, if it isn't, you pass. We typically pass, and that's how we had a 7th round draft pick starting at OLB last season after our starter went down (he played well, but got exposed along with the rest of the defense in the playoff game), and it is also one of the many reasons that our OL was so abysmal in the first half of the year.

We passed, relied on the young guys, and paid a price for that. The OL probably made the difference between the wild card and a division title. In the end, did it make a difference? Who knows, but to say because we didn't "name names" we're wrong is ridiculous.

I'll give you the argument on the OL. The Packers went into the season praying that Clifton wouldn't get hurt, and that Barbre could do the job, and their prayers were not answered. The DB situation was different though. Their depth at CB was fine until they lost 3 guys to injuries. Any team would have been affected by that. The only way the Packers would have been okay there would have been if they started with 6 or 7 quality experienced CB's. No team has that.

[sharpe1027]

I agree with Retail that in principle, the Packers could have improved their team through Free Agency. I would even go so far as to say that they might have been able to make the difference in making it to the superbowl.

That doesn't mean that they necessarily should have gone out and grabbed more FAs.

In a perfect world, the Packers could have known exactly which FAs would be gold and which would be wastes of money and a roster spot. The Packers could also have known which of their existing backups would have realized their potential and which would have failed to improve.

The world's not perfect and neither are the Packer talent evaluators. It's a tough call, but I'm OK with them moving forward with a long-term strategy that gives them a good shot year in and year out. I only hope that's what they have going.

[bobblehead]

Hear, Hear! Retail, Fritz has you dead to rights. If you are making the argument that TT could and should be doing more to improve the situation at CB or OL, then you are obligated to provide some sort of strategy he should follow. Who are the prospects he could get? Should he trade someone on the roster to get a CB or OLineman? If so who? If you don't have a plan, then you should limit yourself to "TT needs to do better to win a superbowl." Then your either right or wrong based on whether they win it all this year. As it currently stands, all you are doing is complaining.

I know you haven't been around much, but I did what you're asking in THIS VERY THREAD. Go back and read the lovely responses.... I'm making the point that naming names doesn't work because of that... all you get is a bunch of excuses as to "why that won't work". What it all means is that there "is nobody better than what we have". That's my point.

Thanks for sharing.

Actually I can refute your point pretty easily:

there is no one that we can get to sign and come to green bay, without paying them way to much, that we could bring in to improve. Since you accept your assertion as a fact, i am accepting mine.

Now, ball is back in your court, you have to prove me wrong.

On a side note, I don't disagree with you that its possible TT could do those things, I am simply going to judge the man on W/L and being in a position to win the big one. So far his overall W/L is pretty solid, and we were in the NFCC once, and the playoffs twice in the last 3 years. This year I expect to be deeper into the playoffs and winning 12 games or more. I also hope to win the North. If we do those things I don't care how TT goes about his business (short of signing a bunch of Michael Irvin types).

[bobblehead]

I agree that the bottom of the roster (ie "depth") could certainly be improved. I cant imagine that there is NOT a player available who is the same cost as bush with at least equivalent skills and more upside. I am not a scout and I dont know the league's personnel well enough to name specif names, but logic leads me to believe that there has to be SOMEONE or more than someone who is better. Just because TT hasn't identified those players yet, does not mean he won't make some changes when he identifies them.

I personally love how TT has built the team and developed youth. SOOO much better than the sherman years where he continuously reached for talent, sacrificing picks and the future. The only question now, is can he take a shot at winning without completely devastating the future.

Focusing on Bush is crap....he was a last resort after 3 guys ahead of him got hurt. He is on the roster because he plays ST well. If ANY team loses their 2,4, and 5 CB's, they will have Jarret Bush on the field. Focusing on BJones is fair, but I think he played ok. Not great, but ok, like a backup is supposed to. This year he has to improve and play like a starter (although I suspect Chillar works at that position in camp this year and takes the job).

[retailguy]

Actually I can refute your point pretty easily:

there is no one that we can get to sign and come to green bay, without paying them way to much, that we could bring in to improve. Since you accept your assertion as a fact, i am accepting mine.

Now, ball is back in your court, you have to prove me wrong.

On a side note, I don't disagree with you that its possible TT could do those things, I am simply going to judge the man on W/L and being in a position to win the big one. So far his overall W/L is pretty solid, and we were in the NFCC once, and the playoffs twice in the last 3 years. This year I expect to be deeper into the playoffs and winning 12 games or more. I also hope to win the North. If we do those things I don't care how TT goes about his business (short of signing a bunch of Michael Irvin types).

Bobblehead, that is my point. You just stated it.

For the past several seasons we've had the same damn argument. Every single time someone lamented that we might have been able to improve a position, someone would shout from the back of the room, "WHO"? If you're so damned smart, tell us "WHO".

Some well meaning soul would offer up a name, and there would be 20 reasons "why that wouldn't work". sometimes valid, sometimes not valid. (See this thread for a clear discussion of that.) You can name ANY NAME, it doesn't matter who it is, and there will be the same standard justifications of why either that person is not better, the money wasn't right, they wouldn't come to Green Bay, Free Agency is not a viable tool any longer, only used washed up talent is out there, everyone does a better job managing the cap yadda, yadda, yadda... :roll:

So today, the standard disclaimer for "we should have signed someone to improve that position", becomes "WHO?". That "assertion" is now the fact. But, the by-product of the "WHO?" argument says that nobody is better (for dozens of reasons), and that simply isn't true.

There are better available players out there, and for many reasons they are not Packers today. Doesn't mean that we couldn't have improved the team. Doesn't mean that "all free agents are worse". It simply means that they aren't Packers, and Ted elected not to improve the team and stand pat with what he had.

If he keeps winning, everyone is happy, but that doesn't mean the criticism is unfair. Quite the opposite actually.

[bobblehead]

I'll give you the argument on the OL. The Packers went into the season praying that Clifton wouldn't get hurt, and that Barbre could do the job, and their prayers were not answered. The DB situation was different though. Their depth at CB was fine until they lost 3 guys to injuries. Any team would have been affected by that. The only way the Packers would have been okay there would have been if they started with 6 or 7 quality experienced CB's. No team has that.

Actually, prior to facing JAllen with no practice at LT, college had performed like most backup LT's in the league....Let me give you a hint, there are ZERO good backup LT's in the league and only about 20 good starters. Lang played about like a normal backup LT....serviceable, but not good.

RT is a different story. I have trouble believing that they didn't know that NIETHER Babre or Giocominni could even get in the way. When they pulled Babre FINALLY and MERCIFULLY they didn't even turn to the SECOND year player who was the backup....they turned to Lang, the rookie, who hadn't taken many snaps at RT. Why was Giocominni even on the roster?? If he breaks camp with the Packers this year it almost better be as the starter at RT cuz he looks so brilliant in camp this year....I can't even think of another argument for keeping him around as a backup (that you won't use).

[bobblehead]

Ted elected not to improve the team and stand pat with what he had.



This is the fallacy of your argument...neither you or I know if he elected to or couldn't. Ted has brought in many guys, but he hasn't sunk money on ONE FA BUST yet. He HAS however signed a defensive MVP.

Could he have signed Nate Clement, Albert Haynesworth, Julius Peppers?? I guess, but how much good has that done those teams so far??

How about when he wouldn't cave to Walker or CWilliams....those guys went on to be prosperous huh??

How about the most active teams in FA...Washington, Cleveland, et all. Every year a team sells out and 95% of the time it fails (and handicaps them for years).

In 2007 the Patriots sold out. They made the superbowl in part due to randy moss(who was considered washed up) and Wes Welker. Both TRADES. TT was right in the hunt for moss til the end. The other guys for the most part have been cut or underperformed (but the cash strapped Pats did have to trade Richard Seymour and look less dominant every year). The FA signings of Donte Stallworth and Adalius Thomas....both off the roster already. Moss is already back to his old ways.

2007 the giants were inactive in FA. A couple rookies no one heard of (and fans likely bitched about when they could have gotten AT) stepped up big and the Giants beat the Patriots in the Superbowl.

So what is the goal...superbowls....then 31 GM's fail yearly, and the ones that succeed do it predominately through the draft. Is the goal being competitive for the superbowl?? then TT is right on track and has been pretty successful.

[bobblehead]

I hate the man

Why is that? What exactly did he do to you?

Seriously, he wrote all that and THAT is what you took from it??

Nutz, I don't agree with you on TT, but I'm glad to see you back making good football posts.

LP, you dont' have to be personally affected to hate a guy. BF has never done a thing to me, but I can't stand him. Same for Reggie Jackson.

I even had a boss once that was really good to me (cuz I have talent), but was just a cocksucker to some of the kids who weren't quite as sharp as me. I despised him (not that I ever told him that).

[hoosier]

I'll give you the argument on the OL. The Packers went into the season praying that Clifton wouldn't get hurt, and that Barbre could do the job, and their prayers were not answered. The DB situation was different though. Their depth at CB was fine until they lost 3 guys to injuries. Any team would have been affected by that. The only way the Packers would have been okay there would have been if they started with 6 or 7 quality experienced CB's. No team has that.

Actually, prior to facing JAllen with no practice at LT, college had performed like most backup LT's in the league....Let me give you a hint, there are ZERO good backup LT's in the league and only about 20 good starters. Lang played about like a normal backup LT....serviceable, but not good.

RT is a different story. I have trouble believing that they didn't know that NIETHER Babre or Giocominni could even get in the way. When they pulled Babre FINALLY and MERCIFULLY they didn't even turn to the SECOND year player who was the backup....they turned to Lang, the rookie, who hadn't taken many snaps at RT. Why was Giocominni even on the roster?? If he breaks camp with the Packers this year it almost better be as the starter at RT cuz he looks so brilliant in camp this year....I can't even think of another argument for keeping him around as a backup (that you won't use).

New Orleans begs to differ. Of course nobody outside of NO could have told you that last year before Jammal Brown went down. But either Bushrod is far more talented than anybody recognized or else New Orleans had him prepared to step up, which would mean that their line coaching might be vastly superior to Green Bay's. The truth is probably somewhere in between those two extremes.

[Tarlam!]

I don't think playing Bush and Bishop lost the Packers the playoffs. I think Capers was outcoached. I don't think if Kampy and Harris had played that the result would have been any different.

The most significant mistakes were by the Packers offense. The scheme Capers played, I read a lot of analysis from the more knowledgable Rats to come to the conclusion that it sucked that afternoon.

I think the Cards wanted it more. That defensive play to end the game in OT was huge. Neither Bush nor Bishop were on the paddock on that play.

[mraynrand]

Hear, Hear! Retail, Fritz has you dead to rights. If you are making the argument that TT could and should be doing more to improve the situation at CB or OL, then you are obligated to provide some sort of strategy he should follow. Who are the prospects he could get? Should he trade someone on the roster to get a CB or OLineman? If so who? If you don't have a plan, then you should limit yourself to "TT needs to do better to win a superbowl." Then your either right or wrong based on whether they win it all this year. As it currently stands, all you are doing is complaining.

I know you haven't been around much, but I did what you're asking in THIS VERY THREAD. Go back and read the lovely responses.... I'm making the point that naming names doesn't work because of that... all you get is a bunch of excuses as to "why that won't work". What it all means is that there "is nobody better than what we have". That's my point.

Thanks for sharing.

That's how sports blogs work. Defend your POV. Enjoy.

[pbmax]

I'll give you the argument on the OL. The Packers went into the season praying that Clifton wouldn't get hurt, and that Barbre could do the job, and their prayers were not answered. The DB situation was different though. Their depth at CB was fine until they lost 3 guys to injuries. Any team would have been affected by that. The only way the Packers would have been okay there would have been if they started with 6 or 7 quality experienced CB's. No team has that.

Actually, prior to facing JAllen with no practice at LT, college had performed like most backup LT's in the league....Let me give you a hint, there are ZERO good backup LT's in the league and only about 20 good starters. Lang played about like a normal backup LT....serviceable, but not good.

RT is a different story. I have trouble believing that they didn't know that NIETHER Babre or Giocominni could even get in the way. When they pulled Babre FINALLY and MERCIFULLY they didn't even turn to the SECOND year player who was the backup....they turned to Lang, the rookie, who hadn't taken many snaps at RT. Why was Giocominni even on the roster?? If he breaks camp with the Packers this year it almost better be as the starter at RT cuz he looks so brilliant in camp this year....I can't even think of another argument for keeping him around as a backup (that you won't use).

New Orleans begs to differ. Of course nobody outside of NO could have told you that last year before Jammal Brown went down. But either Bushrod is far more talented than anybody recognized or else New Orleans had him prepared to step up, which would mean that their line coaching might be vastly superior to Green Bay's. The truth is probably somewhere in between those two extremes.
It does help when replacing a LT to have a good RT and a good LG. They sent a lot of help to Bushrod on his more difficult assignments. I think the Cowboys got to him, but the Colts best chance to take advantage of him had an injury.

Still, he performed well.

[retailguy]

Ted elected not to improve the team and stand pat with what he had.



This is the fallacy of your argument...neither you or I know if he elected to or couldn't. Ted has brought in many guys, but he hasn't sunk money on ONE FA BUST yet. He HAS however signed a defensive MVP.

Could he have signed Nate Clement, Albert Haynesworth, Julius Peppers?? I guess, but how much good has that done those teams so far??

How about when he wouldn't cave to Walker or CWilliams....those guys went on to be prosperous huh??

How about the most active teams in FA...Washington, Cleveland, et all. Every year a team sells out and 95% of the time it fails (and handicaps them for years).

In 2007 the Patriots sold out. They made the superbowl in part due to randy moss(who was considered washed up) and Wes Welker. Both TRADES. TT was right in the hunt for moss til the end. The other guys for the most part have been cut or underperformed (but the cash strapped Pats did have to trade Richard Seymour and look less dominant every year). The FA signings of Donte Stallworth and Adalius Thomas....both off the roster already. Moss is already back to his old ways.

2007 the giants were inactive in FA. A couple rookies no one heard of (and fans likely bitched about when they could have gotten AT) stepped up big and the Giants beat the Patriots in the Superbowl.

So what is the goal...superbowls....then 31 GM's fail yearly, and the ones that succeed do it predominately through the draft. Is the goal being competitive for the superbowl?? then TT is right on track and has been pretty successful.

You're back to talking about starters again. That isn't my point.

I used the word "elected" purposely. It was not a mistake. I am certain that "occasionally" he dabbles into the FA market and we never hear about it. But I am far more certain that the timing of that is "not very often". I am also certain that he "elects" to back away from the table frequently when he dabbles and therefore "chooses" to stand pat with team he has, even if, it isn't as good as it would have been. There are circumstances where that is appropriate.

However, use a baseball analogy. Even the worst hitter in the Major Leagues gets hits. Yes, Ted has signed a defensive MVP. He will always have my kudos for that. But, how many seasons since Woodson and Pickett has it been since we signed even a servicable backup in FA? I'm fairly certain that the last one that made the team was Frank Walker.

The "odds" of signing someone aren't this poor if you are truly playing in hte FA market. Dozens of players switch teams every year. I think this is why Ted is getting criticism in spite of the direction the team appears to be pointing. This season should tell us a lot, and will show us first hand if building the team this way works.

I just remember Wolf plugging holes, or better phrased trying to plug holes. It seemed as if he "knew & trusted" his evaluations of these lunch pail players and would rather bring someone new in to see if they'd be better than merely standing pat.

It just seemed more important to him than it does to Ted. If I was inside 1265, then I'd know. I'm not, so I speculate based on the info I am able to gather.

As I've said here and elsewhere, we shall see if it is enough to get "over the top" this season. There is no discernable reason today that this should "not" be THE season.

[Scott Campbell]

But, how many seasons since Woodson and Pickett has it been since we signed even a servicable backup in FA? I'm fairly certain that the last one that made the team was Frank Walker.


Chillar.

[retailguy]

But, how many seasons since Woodson and Pickett has it been since we signed even a servicable backup in FA? I'm fairly certain that the last one that made the team was Frank Walker.


Chillar.

He happened after Walker? If so, then I stand corrected. Is that 3 years ago then, or four?

[falco]

But, how many seasons since Woodson and Pickett has it been since we signed even a servicable backup in FA? I'm fairly certain that the last one that made the team was Frank Walker.


Chillar.

He happened after Walker? If so, then I stand corrected. Is that 3 years ago then, or four?

2 years ago (2008 offseason)

[ThunderDan]

I used the word "elected" purposely. It was not a mistake. I am certain that "occasionally" he dabbles into the FA market and we never hear about it. But I am far more certain that the timing of that is "not very often". I am also certain that he "elects" to back away from the table frequently when he dabbles and therefore "chooses" to stand pat with team he has, even if, it isn't as good as it would have been. There are circumstances where that is appropriate.

It just seemed more important to him than it does to Ted. If I was inside 1265, then I'd know. I'm not, so I speculate based on the info I am able to gather.



Wow, for someone who says he isn't inside 1265 Lombardi, you certainly know for certain what happens there.

You have no clue what really happens there and neither do I.

[Tarlam!]

I think you're making assumptions based on what you want to read, Dan. I may be splitting hairs again, but I think you're picking a fight on a personal basis and not arguing against the content. RG is certain, he says. Nowhere has he said he knows anything for certain.

He acknowledges that he can't know for certain and underlines it by stating he is purely speculating. Yet you feel the need to attack him personally.

You're obviously an intelligent and articulate poster and you offer some really good insights which I tend to enjoy. And you don't back off of a point if you feel strongly about it - you're not to be intimidated. I respect that.

But your personal vendetta doesn't make you look very objective and does you no justice.

[Fritz]

Good points, but I'm just not sure who the FA's were this year that Thompson was supposed to bring in.

I don't buy that Jason Taylor or Adalius Thomas are any better than Brad Jones at this point.

Trades are possible, but everybody here clamors to trade Colledge for an OLB. But if Colledge is as awful as many believe, what kind of OLB are you going to get for him?

Someone else mentioned the Jets trading a third for Cromartie. But who would you rather have on your roster: the third round pick of ours, Burnett, or Cromartie?

Fritz, I kind of agree with what you're saying about Taylor & Thomas, but what I have never understood is why we don't bring one of them to camp for competition at least. They could push Jones to improve faster, or if he stumbles to provide a stop gap until he's ready.

It doesn't make sense to load up on undrafted free agents who might develop into something 3 years from now. Don't get me wrong, we need those guys too, but do we need as many as he typically brings to camp?

Couldn't we take 3 or 4 positions that we're weak at, and bring in servicable guys too? Example - OL, OLB, and CB are frequently mentioned here as being weak links. He made the OL a big priority in the draft, but did nothing (or very little) at OLB. Isn't Taylor or Thomas better than a street free agent or perhaps the guys on our practice squad? Why do all the FA's have to start?

Can't they push for that role, once in a while? :huh:

Okay, here's the one place I found in the thread where you mentioned names, Retail. So help me understand: you would as a GM like to sign, say Jason Taylor. The post after this one gave you the contract numbers for Taylor - fairly large. So then you are saying you would tell Taylor he's moving to the other side, right? And let him compete for a job with Jones, maybe push the kid.

I admit to being ignorant of Taylor's numbers and level of play last year. Does anyone know how he did?

See, Retail, at least now we can have an actual debate about the pros and cons of a player. Maybe he would have been a good pick up, had he been willing to sign with GB and switch sides. I'm not sure he would have been willing to sign in GB and switch spots, but maybe he would have.

[ThunderDan]

I think you're making assumptions based on what you want to read, Dan. I may be splitting hairs again, but I think you're picking a fight on a personal basis and not arguing against the content. RG is certain, he says. Nowhere has he said he knows anything for certain.

He acknowledges that he can't know for certain and underlines it by stating he is purely speculating. Yet you feel the need to attack him personally.

You're obviously an intelligent and articulate poster and you offer some really good insights which I tend to enjoy. And you don't back off of a point if you feel strongly about it - you're not to be intimidated. I respect that.

But your personal vendetta doesn't make you look very objective and does you no justice.

So when RG says He's CERTAIN 3 times in a paragraph he isn't CERTAIN? :roll:

That makes no sense. I have no doubt in my mind that TT evaluates every potenetial FA that could help the Packers. It makes no sense at all that someone whose job depends on how well the Packers are doing and the direction of the franchise to specifically not use a tool to help build his club.

I certainly know that TT's knowledge of football players, the free agent market and building a franchise are much great than mine and most human beings. You don't get honored as executive of the year 2 out of 3 years in the NFL by luck.

[retailguy]

I think you're making assumptions based on what you want to read, Dan. I may be splitting hairs again, but I think you're picking a fight on a personal basis and not arguing against the content. RG is certain, he says. Nowhere has he said he knows anything for certain.

He acknowledges that he can't know for certain and underlines it by stating he is purely speculating. Yet you feel the need to attack him personally.

You're obviously an intelligent and articulate poster and you offer some really good insights which I tend to enjoy. And you don't back off of a point if you feel strongly about it - you're not to be intimidated. I respect that.

But your personal vendetta doesn't make you look very objective and does you no justice.

Thanks Tar. You captured the essense of what I was trying to say perfectly and I appreciate it very much.

[Scott Campbell]

You don't get honored as executive of the year 2 out of 3 years in the NFL by luck.


I thought Ted only won once.

[ThunderDan]

You don't get honored as executive of the year 2 out of 3 years in the NFL by luck.


I thought Ted only won once.

I thought he got 2009 Exeuctive of the Year also.

[hoosier]

Polian got it in 2009. Again. He is by far and away the best NFL GM in the era of free agency.

[Fritz]

I think you're making assumptions based on what you want to read, Dan. I may be splitting hairs again, but I think you're picking a fight on a personal basis and not arguing against the content. RG is certain, he says. Nowhere has he said he knows anything for certain.

He acknowledges that he can't know for certain and underlines it by stating he is purely speculating. Yet you feel the need to attack him personally.

You're obviously an intelligent and articulate poster and you offer some really good insights which I tend to enjoy. And you don't back off of a point if you feel strongly about it - you're not to be intimidated. I respect that.

But your personal vendetta doesn't make you look very objective and does you no justice.

Thanks Tar. You captured the essense of what I was trying to say perfectly and I appreciate it very much.

Okay, Retail, I found your earlier post mentioning Taylor and Thomas. I commented on Taylor and I would like to hear you talk about how you envisioned him signing up with the Pack - what his motivations might be (maybe he's been talking publicly about wanting to go to a winner?), and I'd like to hear you talk about why you think a switch of sides for him or for CMII could work well. Maybe it's not as hard to switch sides as I seem to think.

So help me understand. I'm not close-minded on this. I just would like you or someone to explain how Taylor at this point in his career might have been a good fit that TT failed to see. Cuz maybe he did. Maybe I'd like it better than Obiozor as a backup. Maybe because it's an uncapped year it could've gotten done. Convince me or at least convince me it was a reasonable idea. I'm open to listening to your case.

[Pugger]

Is Taylor still as effective now as he was earlier in his career? I suspect TT thinks Jones has more of an upside with his youth and is cheaper.

[retailguy]

I think you're making assumptions based on what you want to read, Dan. I may be splitting hairs again, but I think you're picking a fight on a personal basis and not arguing against the content. RG is certain, he says. Nowhere has he said he knows anything for certain.

He acknowledges that he can't know for certain and underlines it by stating he is purely speculating. Yet you feel the need to attack him personally.

You're obviously an intelligent and articulate poster and you offer some really good insights which I tend to enjoy. And you don't back off of a point if you feel strongly about it - you're not to be intimidated. I respect that.

But your personal vendetta doesn't make you look very objective and does you no justice.

Thanks Tar. You captured the essense of what I was trying to say perfectly and I appreciate it very much.

Okay, Retail, I found your earlier post mentioning Taylor and Thomas. I commented on Taylor and I would like to hear you talk about how you envisioned him signing up with the Pack - what his motivations might be (maybe he's been talking publicly about wanting to go to a winner?), and I'd like to hear you talk about why you think a switch of sides for him or for CMII could work well. Maybe it's not as hard to switch sides as I seem to think.

So help me understand. I'm not close-minded on this. I just would like you or someone to explain how Taylor at this point in his career might have been a good fit that TT failed to see. Cuz maybe he did. Maybe I'd like it better than Obiozor as a backup. Maybe because it's an uncapped year it could've gotten done. Convince me or at least convince me it was a reasonable idea. I'm open to listening to your case.

Fritz, when I saw your post this morning I wanted to take some time to think about how I wanted to respond. Then I read Dan's post and decided that how I responded doesn't matter.

You found my original post. You also then should have found the other posts discussing why I'm a complete lunatic and can't think clearly. You, by now, should have also read Dan's post this AM about how "certain" I am about all of this stuff.

I tried to have this discussion several days ago. It didn't work. It won't work this time, as it is more fun to ridicule me personally, and bash me for presenting a "name free agent" than it is to consider the subtstance of what I'm trying to say.

The picture is bigger than Taylor or Thomas. You focused on Taylor, I focus on Thomas. Taylor has already been signed by the Jets. He probably wouldn't have considered Green Bay even if Ted made overtures, which is unlikely.

I think that Thomas is different. I believe he's got something left in the tank. I also believe he's got attitude issues. But, I think he's clearly better than anything else we've got except for CMIII, and Jones clearly has more upside. So, bringing him in would be a low risk move, PROVIDED, he's willing to fight for a starting role, and WILLINGLY accept a backup role if he doesn't get it. But, we don't consider those things. It doesn't fit the model.

The model is really where my focus lies, instead of on individual players. I've been talking about the same things for many years now related to the OL. It seemed pointless to focus the discussion there with this latest effort. We focused on the OL in the draft this year, and have promising young guys again that we need to develop. There is no longer room for veteran backups. I am fine with that, because I was NOT fine with most of the talent we had there at the beginning of last season. We played with holes there last year, PURPOSELY. We relied on someone stepping up, with both Barbre and Sitton, and had a 50% success rate. We also relied on Clifton not getting injured, which didn't happen. We got burned there too. Yet, the discussion gets diverted from "why do we play with holes?" to all this other crap.

The fact is that folks still justify Colledge and his performance when in reality he has only had 1/2 of 1 good season (out of FOUR) baffles me. Every single season under McCarthy the line has stunk the first half of the season. In 2008, Colledge lit it up for the latter part of the season. Other than that, he's a dud. We talk about this over and over and over, but never talk about WHY we got into that position in the first place.

It's a philosophy difference between Thompson and Wolf. As I've stated elsewhere, this season should show us which is better. This team is almost exactly where the 1995 Packers team was. Wolf brought in lots of different faces both before the season and during the season. This year has been different so far, and is likely to stay that way. Polar opposite philosophy should allow some stark comparisons.

What would have happened last year if this team didn't suck on the OL the first half of the season? Would they have won the division? Would they have had a different path in the playoffs? Would they have had greater momentum going into this year? And most importantly, how would an improved OL have changed last seasons performance?

We don't get answers to those questions, but most in these rooms, including you, are more interested in defending every single thing that Ted Thompson does, so we don't talk about these things. When they are brought up, we demand "NAME FUCKING NAMES YOU COMPLAINING ASSHOLE". And down the rabbit trail goes the discussion.

I'm not playing in the "name names" game any longer. Quite honestly, after re-reading the hatchet jobs in this thread, and Dan's lovely missive this morning, I'm probably done voicing my opinions again for a while. I'm quite tired of having individual words taken from what I write out of context, and heading down the rabbit trail yet again. I'm tired of being ridiculed because I played along and named names, and then get the obligitory gutless "WHO ME?" bullshit when I call them out on it.

Quite honestly, I don't give a damn what the Packers do right now, as much as it pains me to say that. Please don't be offended when I don't respond to you, I'm really done with this thread. It's pointless to continue this
discussion.

Do any of you guys ever wonder where the folks are that don't agree with what you write? Do you even notice that they are gone?

[falco]

Do any of you guys ever wonder where the folks are that don't agree with what you write? Do you even notice that they are gone?

Wow.. I actually get the point your trying to make RG - I think there are arguments both for and against TT's mentality. I get that it may make sense to bring in some veteran backups; it doesn't have to be Peppers or Haynesworth; it could be more guys just like Chillar. Perhaps if there was a guy like that at CB that we could have picked up / traded for, we would have been much better down the stretch.

But I don't see where anybody is attacking you, at least in this thread. You're digging pretty deep just to be able to cry foul...

And for what its worth, you're just as much a divisive figure on this board with your haughty attitude and smug remarks; there is plenty of blame to go around for why some people aren't here anymore.

[RashanGary]

It's a philosophy difference between Thompson and Wolf. As I've stated elsewhere, this season should show us which is better. This team is almost exactly where the 1995 Packers team was. Wolf brought in lots of different faces both before the season and during the season. This year has been different so far, and is likely to stay that way. Polar opposite philosophy should allow some stark comparisons.




And you don't want to name names because you know the FA climate has changed. You know the names aren't out there and the failures are abound. Nobody likes to play that game because in hindsight, they know the odds are 2:1 that the guy they want is a massive failure and you'll be eating crow yet again. Teams don't tend to let good players go in todays FA market.

In the last 15 years, the 1996 Packers were one of the exceptions that built decent portions of their team with UFA. Thompson was director of pro personnel at that time, but I digress. . . . It was the early years of the CBA and Wolf's philosophy took advantage of a lot of GM's that just didn't know how to handle the new rules of free agency.

Fast forward to now. You're trying to use a philosophy that worked 15 years ago in a completely different environment and also being the exception to recent championship models. . . You're talking in a room of Packer fans who saw it happen 15 years ago and are the most likely football fans to assume that it's likely to happen that way again. With that, you keep some small levels of support, but the strong football posters here don't agree. They want you to name names, so next year at this time, we can see if you were right.

That offends you, but it shouldn't. Every year, the Thompson haters want a win it all now or nothign proposition. The problem with that, the Packers have a great chance to win it for many years. Sit back, enjoy the Thompson era. He's not going anywhere and despite your efforts to judge him on what he took over, he's going to be judged on what he's built and that time has just begun.

[Fritz]

Okay, Retail, I don't expect you to respond as you said you would not. But I do like the discussion of players - that's what I like here - so I'd like to take up the Adalius Thomas discussion.

Okay, three sacks last year and 26 tackles in 14 games. He seems like a big guy so no problem holding up physically against the run. That's all I know so far.

[hoosier]

Per NFP the Jets are expected to be interested in Thomas. http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Jets-considering-run-at-Adalius-Thomas.html

It is very difficult for the average fan to get any real insight into what NFL execs really think of specific players. There are plenty of rumors floating around about how Thomas's refusal to fit into the Patriots system destroyed his reputation around the league. This article (by Aaron Wilson) seems to suggest that Thomas simply might not have been a good fit for Belichick's system becuase BB wanted to pigeon hole him in one position whereas (according to Ryan) Thomas's greatest strength is his versalitility and his ability to creat confusion.

Let's imagine for a minute that the reports about Thomas's crappy attitude are overblown and that it was really just a bad fit with the Pats. Put Thomas on a different team that has a solid base and he'll do fine. In that scenario, Ryan on Adalius Thomas does sound a bit like the C Woodson we saw last year, and that might make you think that he's worth taking a shot at. But for a defense that already has that element of unpredictability in Woodson do you really need another one? Or is installing a reliable, assignment sure guy to play LOLB more important than finding a second guy who (according to Ryan, who knows him better than anyone) needs to be given free reign in order to maximize his potential?

[sharpe1027]

On one side it is frustrating to have people basically saying "you prove your point or I'm right."

On the other side of the argument, it is difficult to discuss an opinion when anything other than a generic discussion is deemed a rabbit hole.

As I said before, my opinion is that the Packers certainly could have improved their team with the right FA pickups. Maybe even to the point of a Superbowl win. I'm not so sure that anyone would have had enough foresight/scouting ability/luck to necessarily make all the right pickups.

I'm OK with them not being one of the more active FA teams so long as they keep the players they need and replenish/upgrade the ranks somehow.

[Tarlam!]

So when RG says He's CERTAIN 3 times in a paragraph he isn't CERTAIN? :roll:

That makes no sense.

I may only be "Australian" and my grammar skills might be inferior to yours, but I think my reading comprehension might grade out slightly higher than yours in this instance. I suggest you re-read the correct interpretation I provided.

Your emotional investment in calling out RG is making you blind.

[Pugger]

Do any of you guys ever wonder where the folks are that don't agree with what you write? Do you even notice that they are gone?

Wow.. I actually get the point your trying to make RG - I think there are arguments both for and against TT's mentality. I get that it may make sense to bring in some veteran backups; it doesn't have to be Peppers or Haynesworth; it could be more guys just like Chillar. Perhaps if there was a guy like that at CB that we could have picked up / traded for, we would have been much better down the stretch.

But I don't see where anybody is attacking you, at least in this thread. You're digging pretty deep just to be able to cry foul...

And for what its worth, you're just as much a divisive figure on this board with your haughty attitude and smug remarks; there is plenty of blame to go around for why some people aren't here anymore.

He jumped all over me because I asked about a particular player and it really caught me off guard. He called me out thinking I was directing my comment about folks thinking a name FA has to be better than what's on our roster at him. He told me to get off my high horse and try to think outside of my small brain. This type of behavor isn't endearing by any stretch. I may have snapped at him but it was because I wasn't expecting to be chastised like that for bringing up a player for discussion.

[Tarlam!]

He jumped all over me because I asked about a particular player and it really caught me off guard. He called me out thinking I was directing my comment about folks thinking a name FA has to be better than what's on our roster at him. He told me to get off my high horse and try to think outside of my small brain. This type of behavor isn't endearing by any stretch. I may have snapped at him but it was because I wasn't expecting to be chastised like that for bringing up a player for discussion.

Pugger, you're obviously insulted, but he rightly called you out. Your post was clearly directed at his post where he suggested names only for you to ridicule his suggestion. He provided clear and damning evidence when you asked him to and you responded petulantly.

Then, he let you have it. He torched you, because your conduct was hypocritical.

Now, was he too heavy handed? Yeah, no doubt; a poster like Patler would have made you look ridiculous in a much more gentlemanly manner. Either way, you looked ridiculous, because RG's critism was backed up with cold, hard quotes that, no matter how hard you try, you can't deny came from you.

So, while the possie to lynch RG is forming, don't count me in. He's one of the more polarizing personalities around here for sure, but recently, I haven't seen too much evidence to conclude he initiates personal attacks. Don't expect him to back down once someone levies one against him, though. RG aint no Patler.

[ThunderDan]

So when RG says He's CERTAIN 3 times in a paragraph he isn't CERTAIN? :roll:

That makes no sense.

I may only be "Australian" and my grammar skills might be inferior to yours, but I think my reading comprehension might grade out slightly higher than yours in this instance. I suggest you re-read the correct interpretation I provided.

Your emotional investment in calling out RG is making you blind.

Huh, and your emotional investment of backing RG on every argument is making you blind.

I said RG had no idea what goes on at the GB HQ just like I don't. Isn't that a fact?

Just like I stated what Thomas's and Taylor's contracts were. But somehow that is a personal attack also.

I read his post just fine, thank you for your concern about my reading comprehension.

[Tarlam!]

I said RG had no idea what goes on at the GB HQ just like I don't. Isn't that a fact? Yes, it is a fact that RG pointed out himself as a matter-of-fact.

Just like I stated what Thomas's and Taylor's contracts were. But somehow that is a personal attack also.

I read his post just fine, thank you for your concern about my reading comprehension. Then, you admit it was your intention to attack him and not respond to the content of his post, because anybody with fundamental comprehension skills knows the grammatical difference between the statements "I know for certain" and I am certain".

[Bretsky]

So when RG says He's CERTAIN 3 times in a paragraph he isn't CERTAIN? :roll:

That makes no sense.

I may only be "Australian" and my grammar skills might be inferior to yours, but I think my reading comprehension might grade out slightly higher than yours in this instance. I suggest you re-read the correct interpretation I provided.

Your emotional investment in calling out RG is making you blind.

Huh, and your emotional investment of backing RG on every argument is making you blind.

.


Actually this seems to be an extreme exaggeration; I don't recall too many times Tarlem backing Retailguy. I think most on here would consider Tarlem to be one of the more level headed guys in this joint that see both sides of each argument.

[Bretsky]

I just read a rope on this thread and will be happy to offer suggestions on who TT might have looked at later per Fritz's original response to my post about six pages ago :lol:

Fritz, I don't lump you in here or direct that post at you....but my original response, in my opinion, has been argued over and over regarding TT. When I've thrown out players in the past the standard seems to be how do we know he'd have come here as I noted. Or is he really worht the money. It ends up opening a can of worms just as often.

I was big on Will Weatherspoon (loved that guy) and Chris Hope long ago. That was a year we had a loot of money and I thought TT might be aggressive.

I really don't look at it as.....who out there is better than Brad Jones, or Bigby, for instance . We can also look at it as who is better than Bush or Brett Swain. We don't have to only look for starters; the Saints were a prime example the past couple years of how they can trade for and pick up some very key pieces in free agency where their depth is weak that will help them win a title. They nabbed starters and backups that worked quite well in addition to solid drafting.

I'm no longer convinced TT's way is wrong; we're set up to compete for many years to come. But as I keep noting there are two ways to skin a cat.

But my original post...long ago.....the copout one......I think rings very true as to past reactions I have had when in my free agency tassles. It can make one a bit gunshy about throwing names out there as freely as one used to

[cheesner]

Someone posed the question above, where have contrary view posters gone?

So where is all the anti-TT crowd? As I recall there were those who wanted him fired after his first draft pick, Aaron Rodgers, or was it his 2nd pick, Nick Collins because both of those players where sure to be failures. Or was it before when he didn't sign either of the uber-stud FAs that season, John Abraham or Andre Carter? (IIRC) Most, I suspect have stopped posting for 1 of 2 reasons. They either stopped posting in shame, or they re-signed up under new usernames so they could now profess to be TT fans all along.

The Packers are poised to become an elite team this season and many people are recognizing that. They recognize that nearly every single one of the FAs they clamored for have been failures for the teams that they eventually signed for - or at least not worth it. They see that TT has filled this roster with impressive young talent that is the envy of the league. Therefore, they are reduced to having to admit they were wrong, try to stick to the old 'well TT got lucky with many of those draft picks', or continue to bash TT and say that "sure he is doing great, but he could do even better if he . . ."

Personally, I don't feel sorry for a single one of them. Many of them posted the most vile, hateful, and degrading comments ad nauseam about Thompson that they should feel ashamed. Not just attacking his decisions, by assailing his character, intentions, and personal life. It is like they forget he is a human being doing his best to improve the Packers the best way he can. But, considering the comments posted here, you would think he was the evil egomaniac bent on destroying the Packers in any way he can.

Many of these posters simply refuse to see the other side. Take free agency for example. There are some ramifications of signing FAs that make it unattractive. Team chemistry, player development, salary cap, etc can all be negatively affected. Most teams that go after FAs suffer because of it, and I for one would prefer TT didn't sign any, or maybe one or two of only the highest character players.

[falco]

I was big on Will Weatherspoon (loved that guy) and Chris Hope long ago.

I can't remember what either of these guys got signed for; seems like both got big contracts early on in FA. However, I think both probably would have contributed to the team.

[ThunderDan]

So when RG says He's CERTAIN 3 times in a paragraph he isn't CERTAIN? :roll:

That makes no sense.

I may only be "Australian" and my grammar skills might be inferior to yours, but I think my reading comprehension might grade out slightly higher than yours in this instance. I suggest you re-read the correct interpretation I provided.

Your emotional investment in calling out RG is making you blind.

Huh, and your emotional investment of backing RG on every argument is making you blind.

.


Actually this seems to be an extreme exaggeration; I don't recall too many times Tarlem backing Retailguy. I think most on here would consider Tarlem to be one of the more level headed guys in this joint that see both sides of each argument.

How about here and in the DC fan club thread in the last little bit?

Sure it's an exaggeration, there is also truth to it.

[ThunderDan]

I said RG had no idea what goes on at the GB HQ just like I don't. Isn't that a fact? Yes, it is a fact that RG pointed out himself as a matter-of-fact.

Just like I stated what Thomas's and Taylor's contracts were. But somehow that is a personal attack also.

I read his post just fine, thank you for your concern about my reading comprehension. Then, you admit it was your intention to attack him and not respond to the content of his post, because anybody with fundamental comprehension skills knows the grammatical difference between the statements "I know for certain" and I am certain".

Tarlam!-

When someone says, "I don't know for certain" and then they precedes to give a 6 paragraph dissertation on TT's history and "thought" process on his use of free agency you can pretty much disregard the "I don't know for certain" part.

I was calling RG out on his BS. He gave numerous multi-paragraph posts in this thread on about what has happened in GB and then says he isn't sure. I guess this summer in the Packer prediction thread I am going to say, "I am not certain but I think the Pack will go 12-4." That way if the Packers tank I can use that silly excuse that I wasn't stating a certainty. Half of the fun of these message boards is making bold predictions and assertions and seeing if you are correct or not. Being able to talk a little trash or eat a little humble pie.

If he isn't certain why go after me, Pugger and Fritz all in the same thread? Obviously some cord was struck because RG gave us all the I'm taking my ball and going home speech.

RG states, "I tried to have this discussion several days ago. It didn't work. It won't work this time, as it is more fun to ridicule me personally and bash me for presenting a "name free agent" than it is to consider the substance of what I am trying to say."

He also states, " You found my original post. You also then should have found the other posts discussing why I'm a complete lunatic and can't think clearly."

No one was calling RG a lunatic, I pointed out Thomas's and Taylor's salary and someone else mention that Thomas was "lazy" and cut by the Pats. No one ridiculed RG. Fritz asked for RG to expand his postion and who he thought could help the team.

I am done with this part of the thread, if we want to get back to the original discussion I am happy to continue.

[Pugger]

He jumped all over me because I asked about a particular player and it really caught me off guard. He called me out thinking I was directing my comment about folks thinking a name FA has to be better than what's on our roster at him. He told me to get off my high horse and try to think outside of my small brain. This type of behavor isn't endearing by any stretch. I may have snapped at him but it was because I wasn't expecting to be chastised like that for bringing up a player for discussion.

Pugger, you're obviously insulted, but he rightly called you out. Your post was clearly directed at his post where he suggested names only for you to ridicule his suggestion. He provided clear and damning evidence when you asked him to and you responded petulantly.

Then, he let you have it. He torched you, because your conduct was hypocritical.

Now, was he too heavy handed? Yeah, no doubt; a poster like Patler would have made you look ridiculous in a much more gentlemanly manner. Either way, you looked ridiculous, because RG's critism was backed up with cold, hard quotes that, no matter how hard you try, you can't deny came from you.

So, while the possie to lynch RG is forming, don't count me in. He's one of the more polarizing personalities around here for sure, but recently, I haven't seen too much evidence to conclude he initiates personal attacks. Don't expect him to back down once someone levies one against him, though. RG aint no Patler.

I wasn't even thinking of RG when I said it. This isn't the only forum I participate in and I guess I was tired of folks on countless forums clamoring for every FA out there that has a recognizable name thinking these guys just have to be better than the guys already on thePackers' roster and often these FAs are FAs for a reason. I admit I messed up here and I don't mind if someone calls me out if I screw up but I do mind if they lay into me like that. Unfortunately for some men chivalry is indeed dead.

[Tarlam!]

Wow, for someone who says he isn't inside 1265 Lombardi, you certainly know for certain what happens there.

You have no clue what really happens there and neither do I.

Dan, you are entitled to be "done with this part of the thread". I am pretty much as well. But I want to help the members understand my motives here.

I don't think I took issue with any part of your post except what I have have quoted here. You make assumptions based on what you WANT to read and not what was actually written. And, this was a peronal attack. You admit as much when you write what RG actaully wrote should be disregarded and your interpretation is valid, never mind what was actually written. I don't think that's fair and I'm sure you yourself would cry foul if your actual words were twisted out of context.

Bretsky is accurate; I will defend any poster if the rebuffs get personal. This board doesn't need that shit, if you ask me. It's true, I have a soft spot in my heart for RG, but if he were attacking anybody initially, I'd be the first to step in and call him on it.

Note to Pugger: It's understandable for you to lose your temper, but don't you think it's reasonable for another poster to do the same if he feels he's being unjustly singled out? Or, when an argument against his content appears, then the same content is used to make a similar argument as he made?

I can see both sides, but I remain by my reasoning for entering this part of the discussion. I feel RG was dealt with, not RG's content in both cases where I backed him.

[Fritz]

Per NFP the Jets are expected to be interested in Thomas. http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Jets-considering-run-at-Adalius-Thomas.html

It is very difficult for the average fan to get any real insight into what NFL execs really think of specific players. There are plenty of rumors floating around about how Thomas's refusal to fit into the Patriots system destroyed his reputation around the league. This article (by Aaron Wilson) seems to suggest that Thomas simply might not have been a good fit for Belichick's system becuase BB wanted to pigeon hole him in one position whereas (according to Ryan) Thomas's greatest strength is his versalitility and his ability to creat confusion.

Let's imagine for a minute that the reports about Thomas's crappy attitude are overblown and that it was really just a bad fit with the Pats. Put Thomas on a different team that has a solid base and he'll do fine. In that scenario, Ryan on Adalius Thomas does sound a bit like the C Woodson we saw last year, and that might make you think that he's worth taking a shot at. But for a defense that already has that element of unpredictability in Woodson do you really need another one? Or is installing a reliable, assignment sure guy to play LOLB more important than finding a second guy who (according to Ryan, who knows him better than anyone) needs to be given free reign in order to maximize his potential?

Thank you, Hoosier. This brings up a point I had not thought about - styles of play. If Thomas is a freelancer, does that mean he would have more leeway in deciding whether to attack/cover? If so, would that mean that CMIII would have less leeway on the other side to make those decisions? I don't know enough about how defense works to know if players get to make those kind of decisions or if their roles are set.

It's an interesting question. As is the question of whether Thomas's decreasing numbers the last few years is a result of his age or not being used to his full potential. Would he fit into Capers's system? Is he in pretty good shape?

Good questions. Along with the question of what Brad Jones had been doing this offseason as far as getting stronger.

Sometimes this lack of offseason signings makes me wonder if somebody is in love with Jones or Obiozor.

[hoosier]

Per NFP the Jets are expected to be interested in Thomas. http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Jets-considering-run-at-Adalius-Thomas.html

It is very difficult for the average fan to get any real insight into what NFL execs really think of specific players. There are plenty of rumors floating around about how Thomas's refusal to fit into the Patriots system destroyed his reputation around the league. This article (by Aaron Wilson) seems to suggest that Thomas simply might not have been a good fit for Belichick's system becuase BB wanted to pigeon hole him in one position whereas (according to Ryan) Thomas's greatest strength is his versalitility and his ability to creat confusion.

Let's imagine for a minute that the reports about Thomas's crappy attitude are overblown and that it was really just a bad fit with the Pats. Put Thomas on a different team that has a solid base and he'll do fine. In that scenario, Ryan on Adalius Thomas does sound a bit like the C Woodson we saw last year, and that might make you think that he's worth taking a shot at. But for a defense that already has that element of unpredictability in Woodson do you really need another one? Or is installing a reliable, assignment sure guy to play LOLB more important than finding a second guy who (according to Ryan, who knows him better than anyone) needs to be given free reign in order to maximize his potential?

Thank you, Hoosier. This brings up a point I had not thought about - styles of play. If Thomas is a freelancer, does that mean he would have more leeway in deciding whether to attack/cover? If so, would that mean that CMIII would have less leeway on the other side to make those decisions? I don't know enough about how defense works to know if players get to make those kind of decisions or if their roles are set.

It's an interesting question. As is the question of whether Thomas's decreasing numbers the last few years is a result of his age or not being used to his full potential. Would he fit into Capers's system? Is he in pretty good shape?

Good questions. Along with the question of what Brad Jones had been doing this offseason as far as getting stronger.

Sometimes this lack of offseason signings makes me wonder if somebody is in love with Jones or Obiozor.

I am guessing that TT is confident that Jones is already a good fit for the system and that he will continue to develop. He may never become a star or even the pass rush threat/complement to CMIII that everyone is hoping for, but it sounds like the Packers think they can get that from a variety of places. If the strength of Capers's scheme is creating unpredictability (not knowing where the pressure is coming from) maybe having a second pass rushing specialist at LOLB is not as important as we think.

I also suspect that TT's conservative nature would cause him to shy away from someone like Thomas who has not always shown himself to be a team-oriented player. Woodson had a similar reputation: very talented but with questions about motivation and selfishness. But TT pursued Woodson at a time when the Packers were rebuilding. Now they are on the cusp of being one of the elite teams in the league, and TT may be inclined to play things more carefully to avoid mucking up a good thing. I think if Capers were familiar with Thomas the way Ryan is and felt he still had something to offer, it would easier to imagine TT pursuing him.

[Fritz]

Per NFP the Jets are expected to be interested in Thomas. http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Jets-considering-run-at-Adalius-Thomas.html

It is very difficult for the average fan to get any real insight into what NFL execs really think of specific players. There are plenty of rumors floating around about how Thomas's refusal to fit into the Patriots system destroyed his reputation around the league. This article (by Aaron Wilson) seems to suggest that Thomas simply might not have been a good fit for Belichick's system becuase BB wanted to pigeon hole him in one position whereas (according to Ryan) Thomas's greatest strength is his versalitility and his ability to creat confusion.

Let's imagine for a minute that the reports about Thomas's crappy attitude are overblown and that it was really just a bad fit with the Pats. Put Thomas on a different team that has a solid base and he'll do fine. In that scenario, Ryan on Adalius Thomas does sound a bit like the C Woodson we saw last year, and that might make you think that he's worth taking a shot at. But for a defense that already has that element of unpredictability in Woodson do you really need another one? Or is installing a reliable, assignment sure guy to play LOLB more important than finding a second guy who (according to Ryan, who knows him better than anyone) needs to be given free reign in order to maximize his potential?

Thank you, Hoosier. This brings up a point I had not thought about - styles of play. If Thomas is a freelancer, does that mean he would have more leeway in deciding whether to attack/cover? If so, would that mean that CMIII would have less leeway on the other side to make those decisions? I don't know enough about how defense works to know if players get to make those kind of decisions or if their roles are set.

It's an interesting question. As is the question of whether Thomas's decreasing numbers the last few years is a result of his age or not being used to his full potential. Would he fit into Capers's system? Is he in pretty good shape?

Good questions. Along with the question of what Brad Jones had been doing this offseason as far as getting stronger.

Sometimes this lack of offseason signings makes me wonder if somebody is in love with Jones or Obiozor.

I am guessing that TT is confident that Jones is already a good fit for the system and that he will continue to develop. He may never become a star or even the pass rush threat/complement to CMIII that everyone is hoping for, but it sounds like the Packers think they can get that from a variety of places. If the strength of Capers's scheme is creating unpredictability (not knowing where the pressure is coming from) maybe having a second pass rushing specialist at LOLB is not as important as we think.

I also suspect that TT's conservative nature would cause him to shy away from someone like Thomas who has not always shown himself to be a team-oriented player. Woodson had a similar reputation: very talented but with questions about motivation and selfishness. But TT pursued Woodson at a time when the Packers were rebuilding. Now they are on the cusp of being one of the elite teams in the league, and TT may be inclined to play things more carefully to avoid mucking up a good thing. I think if Capers were familiar with Thomas the way Ryan is and felt he still had something to offer, it would easier to imagine TT pursuing him.

Hoosier, your last comment (which I put into boldface) is a good one - and a point I hadn't thought of. Maybe it's a lack of familiarity as much as anything.

I also wanted to post some comments I found from someone who supports the idea of signing Thomas. I find them fairly convincing arguments and I'm thinking now - as the comments below suggest - that IF Thomas is willing to be a team guy and be a willing backup/mentor if he can't beat out Jones, and IF Poppinga's special teams play is replaceable, then signing Thomas might be a good move.

So - here are the comments:

"Thomas is 32, probably has 3 good years left. He is 6'2" and 270. Can play inside linebacker, outside linebacker, and defensive end. Has played his entire career in a 3-4. two probowls with the Ravens, would have had more if he stayed, I think.

Rex Ryan says that his biggest asset is his versatility all over the field causing matchup problems. With CMIII, and Woodson also creating matchup problems this could be an interesting package.

Makes Poppinga expendable, and probably makes a low level inside linebacker backup expendable too.

It makes no sense to me that if the guy is that versatile he couldn't play the LOLB position. No need to move CMIII.

You can read his Bio at: http://www.patriots.com/team/index.cfm?ac=playerbio&bio=30839

Again, I think he is better than every linebacker we have except for: CMII, Hawk & Barnett. Today, he is better than Jones, but Jones has better upside, and could benefit from a veteran presense if Thomas is willing to teach."

Pretty interesting and thoughtful stuff.

[Pugger]

Wow, for someone who says he isn't inside 1265 Lombardi, you certainly know for certain what happens there.

You have no clue what really happens there and neither do I.

Dan, you are entitled to be "done with this part of the thread". I am pretty much as well. But I want to help the members understand my motives here.

I don't think I took issue with any part of your post except what I have have quoted here. You make assumptions based on what you WANT to read and not what was actually written. And, this was a peronal attack. You admit as much when you write what RG actaully wrote should be disregarded and your interpretation is valid, never mind what was actually written. I don't think that's fair and I'm sure you yourself would cry foul if your actual words were twisted out of context.

Bretsky is accurate; I will defend any poster if the rebuffs get personal. This board doesn't need that shit, if you ask me. It's true, I have a soft spot in my heart for RG, but if he were attacking anybody initially, I'd be the first to step in and call him on it.

Note to Pugger: It's understandable for you to lose your temper, but don't you think it's reasonable for another poster to do the same if he feels he's being unjustly singled out? Or, when an argument against his content appears, then the same content is used to make a similar argument as he made?

I can see both sides, but I remain by my reasoning for entering this part of the discussion. I feel RG was dealt with, not RG's content in both cases where I backed him.

There is nothing wrong with him feeling I was singling him out. That wasn't my intent and for that I am sorry. But I lost my temper after he questioned my intelligence in a post dripping with sacrasm. We can disagree without being disagreeable. He can call me out if I mess up without infering that I'm a dumb ass.

[Tarlam!]

We can disagree without being disagreeable. He can call me out if I mess up without infering that I'm a dumb ass.

No question about it and I'm sorry for both of you that it escalated the way it did. I wouldn't take it to heart and I certainly wouldn't want you to hold a grudge. I'm sure RG isn't holding one,

I don't think anyone here seriously questions your intelligence, Pugger. Tempers get frayed on these boards.

You post on many other boards, so you know how vulgar it is out there. Packer Rats is a haven of well mannered posters by most comparisons.

[sharpe1027]

Hoosier, your last comment (which I put into boldface) is a good one - and a point I hadn't thought of. Maybe it's a lack of familiarity as much as anything.

I also wanted to post some comments I found from someone who supports the idea of signing Thomas. I find them fairly convincing arguments and I'm thinking now - as the comments below suggest - that IF Thomas is willing to be a team guy and be a willing backup/mentor if he can't beat out Jones, and IF Poppinga's special teams play is replaceable, then signing Thomas might be a good move.

So - here are the comments:

"Thomas is 32, probably has 3 good years left. He is 6'2" and 270. Can play inside linebacker, outside linebacker, and defensive end. Has played his entire career in a 3-4. two probowls with the Ravens, would have had more if he stayed, I think.

Rex Ryan says that his biggest asset is his versatility all over the field causing matchup problems. With CMIII, and Woodson also creating matchup problems this could be an interesting package.

Makes Poppinga expendable, and probably makes a low level inside linebacker backup expendable too.

It makes no sense to me that if the guy is that versatile he couldn't play the LOLB position. No need to move CMIII.

You can read his Bio at: http://www.patriots.com/team/index.cfm?ac=playerbio&bio=30839

Again, I think he is better than every linebacker we have except for: CMII, Hawk & Barnett. Today, he is better than Jones, but Jones has better upside, and could benefit from a veteran presense if Thomas is willing to teach."

Pretty interesting and thoughtful stuff.

So, the real question is whether or not it is worth it to spend a significant amount of money for a guy that is a slight upgrade on the upper end and would be an improvement on depth on the lower end.

On one hand, they have some room to spend money.

On the other hand, going after a guy that might not start in FA and paying him significantly more than you pay other starters would give ammunition for players wanting extensions/contract renegotiated.

[Upnorth]

From what I have seen over the last 5 years of free agency the value of free agency can be found in the "mid-level" players. Superstar free agents are hit and miss, but there have been some FA's who were projected as just average / depth who have turned into something special. An added benifit to this is when the average player tanks it hurts a lot less as well.

[RashanGary]

From what I have seen over the last 5 years of free agency the value of free agency can be found in the "mid-level" players. Superstar free agents are hit and miss, but there have been some FA's who were projected as just average / depth who have turned into something special. An added benifit to this is when the average player tanks it hurts a lot less as well.

NE has done well at this. They've gotten some older players who want a ring and some darn solid mid-level FA's that played better with NE than they had with their previous teams.

They've lost that championship luster. Now those players are getting spread around more. With the Packers knocking on the doorstep of elite, maybe they can cash in on some of that.

Also, if teams start to view the Packers as a dominate football team, we might get more biters than we had in the past from regular FA's, not just older ones. There are a lot of players who care about a championship.