WOW people get paid to write this crap?

[Tony Oday]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Falcons-wide-receiver-Roddy-White-poised-for-100-catches-051510

It is such a leap of faith to say that if GB, or any team really, lost its starting QB the season could suck...WOW...insight abound!

[Lurker64]

Yeah, go ahead and point out that Green Bay wouldn't be very good this year if Aaron Rodgers gets injured.

At the same time though, why not point out that the Colts are like a 3-13 team without Peyton Manning?

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I agree its pretty dumb to point something like that out. But at the same time I think it is more a question of the depth that we have behind Rodgers. We are a superbowl contending team and I would feel better if we went out and picked up a good vet to back up Rodgers.

[BlueBrewer]

Point No. 4: I'm glad Brian Cushing got to keep his Defensive Rookie of the Year Award.

That says it all right there.

[RashanGary]

The way Flynn has progressed, I wouldn't be surprised if we went .500 in games with Flynn. It would hurt to lose Rodgers, but if it was for 4-6 games, I still think we'd have a chance to win enough to get in the playoffs.

[bobblehead]

MM had faith in Rodgers to take over for Favre. He has faith in Flynn to be his backup....thats good enough for me.

[packerbacker1234]

MM had faith in Rodgers to take over for Favre. He has faith in Flynn to be his backup....thats good enough for me.

yeah, that flynn has looked decent in preseason games, and outside of the pick he looked ok for limited time in a real game.

I think the packers are pretty comfortable having to put flynn out there for a few games should Rodgers get hurt, but obviously the goal is not let AR get hurt. Obviously, thats not always controllable. He falls wrong on a sack, gets accidently rolled up on, gets his arm hit hard while in the throwing motion - lots of things could happen that may sideline any QB. Honestly it was a weak reason for anything. Every team is pretty screwed if they lose their starter, and I doubt we are the worse for wear of every team out there.

I mean, say favre comes back and he gets hurt - based on last season that is a pretty steep drop off in perofrmance to jackson. Manning gets hurt big drop off. Brady big drop off. Hell, palmer... you can name any pretty good to great QB out there, and if the team loses him the season is pretty much over.

It's the way it goes. Bad writing is bad.

[Tarlam!]

I would feel better if we went out and picked up a good vet to back up Rodgers.

Outside of (maybe) Leftwich, who were you thinking about? Honestly, I don't think there's a vet UFA that would make me sleep any easier nor do I see any backups on other rosters I'd trade for.

[Pugger]

Would Marc Bulger be a horrid veteran back-up? Of course MB might still want to be a starter somewhere and he might have a long wait there...

[retailguy]

Would Marc Bulger be a horrid veteran back-up? Of course MB might still want to be a starter somewhere and he might have a long wait there...

weren't you just excoriating folks the other day for picking "name brand" free agents? :?:

[Pugger]

Would Marc Bulger be a horrid veteran back-up? Of course MB might still want to be a starter somewhere and he might have a long wait there...

weren't you just excoriating folks the other day for picking "name brand" free agents? :?:

Huh? I don't recall doing that. I was just throwing a name out there for discussion, that's all. Geez.

[Tony Oday]

Would Marc Bulger be a horrid veteran back-up? Of course MB might still want to be a starter somewhere and he might have a long wait there...

weren't you just excoriating folks the other day for picking "name brand" free agents? :?:

Huh? I don't recall doing that. I was just throwing a name out there for discussion, that's all. Geez.

But at QB a "name" FA is usually a decent one for the backup role.

[retailguy]

Huh? I don't recall doing that. I was just throwing a name out there for discussion, that's all. Geez.

Well, let me refresh your bad memory a bit.


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.

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=20577

(Complete with the rolling eyes icon and everything!)

Please note that this was in DIRECT RESPONSE to my posting about our LB depth, and I had the audacity to trot out two "name FA" who I thought would have provided competition. (I guess I could maintain that I was trying to "start discussion" too)

So, perhaps in the future, you might come down off the high horse a bit, and realize that ideas can originate outside of your little brain too, and they don't have to be criticized because you don't agree.

So, considering the above, how about you clarify your love for Marc Bulger? I'd really like to understand why this particular name free agent is better than the LB name free agents.... And please specifically tell me what is wrong with Matt Flynn and why Ted shouldn't prefer his home grown boy to Bulger. (since those were your words, not mine...)

[Tony Oday]

Huh? I don't recall doing that. I was just throwing a name out there for discussion, that's all. Geez.

Well, let me refresh your bad memory a bit.


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.

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=20577

(Complete with the rolling eyes icon and everything!)

Please note that this was in DIRECT RESPONSE to my posting about our LB depth, and I had the audacity to trot out two "name FA" who I thought would have provided competition. (I guess I could maintain that I was trying to "start discussion" too)

So, perhaps in the future, you might come down off the high horse a bit, and realize that ideas can originate outside of your little brain too, and they don't have to be criticized because you don't agree.

So, considering the above, how about you clarify your love for Marc Bulger? I'd really like to understand why this particular name free agent is better than the LB name free agents.... And please specifically tell me what is wrong with Matt Flynn and why Ted shouldn't prefer his home grown boy to Bulger. (since those were your words, not mine...)

Well I would say it is because at OLB that player is actually going to play. Though I like AT is he really as good as he used to be or will he disrupt the chemistry we have in GB? Bulger is a player you would sign praying he never sees the field ala Doug Pederson or the bastard from the bears :)

[retailguy]

Bulger is a player you would sign praying he never sees the field ala Doug Pederson or the bastard from the bears :)

I agree, but what I don't understand is how that makes him better than Flynn? From my vantage point, that's exactly what we have, but he hasn't been injured so much, and actually knows the system unlike Bulger who has never to my knowledge played in the WCO...

As to Thomas, I think he's got something left (and plenty of experience in a 3-4). Guess someone else will find out because, true to form, we aren't interested because we didn't draft the guy.

[Tony Oday]

Bulger is a player you would sign praying he never sees the field ala Doug Pederson or the bastard from the bears :)

I agree, but what I don't understand is how that makes him better than Flynn?

As to Thomas, I think he's got something left. Guess someone else will find out because, true to form, we aren't interested because we didn't draft the guy.

I cant say he is but I can say that Bulger has proved what he can do and Flynn hasn't.

Thomas I think he does too and I thinik TT will sign him if the price is right closer to Camp...just my thought.

[retailguy]

Bulger is a player you would sign praying he never sees the field ala Doug Pederson or the bastard from the bears :)

I agree, but what I don't understand is how that makes him better than Flynn?

As to Thomas, I think he's got something left. Guess someone else will find out because, true to form, we aren't interested because we didn't draft the guy.

I cant say he is but I can say that Bulger has proved what he can do and Flynn hasn't.

Thomas I think he does too and I thinik TT will sign him if the price is right closer to Camp...just my thought.

Flynn deserves a chance, and he's old enough now to be a competent backup QB. I was on this train when he was the backup as a rookie, and then to a certain extent last year. But now? He damn well better be ready to play. A "name free agent" QB should not be necessary.

As to LB, I think when you dislike your available backups so much that you won't start them when your starter gets injured, and instead you start a rookie with ZERO experience, it's a damning statement related to those backups. We can't find anyone to replace them except a street rookie free agent? Really? That makes no sense to me. That's why I think the available LB'ers are viable choices, because it is abundantly clear we really don't trust the guys we got.

[Pugger]

Huh? I don't recall doing that. I was just throwing a name out there for discussion, that's all. Geez.

Well, let me refresh your bad memory a bit.


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.

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=20577

(Complete with the rolling eyes icon and everything!)

Please note that this was in DIRECT RESPONSE to my posting about our LB depth, and I had the audacity to trot out two "name FA" who I thought would have provided competition. (I guess I could maintain that I was trying to "start discussion" too)

So, perhaps in the future, you might come down off the high horse a bit, and realize that ideas can originate outside of your little brain too, and they don't have to be criticized because you don't agree.

So, considering the above, how about you clarify your love for Marc Bulger? I'd really like to understand why this particular name free agent is better than the LB name free agents.... And please specifically tell me what is wrong with Matt Flynn and why Ted shouldn't prefer his home grown boy to Bulger. (since those were your words, not mine...)



Yes, some fans do think a name guy is better than anyone on our roster. Who the hell loves Bulger? Some guys talked about getting a vet QB and this was the only one I thought of as a back-up worth discussing, nothing more. I like Flynn and I think TT truly found a steal in that draft with him. Are you this charming in real life? Jesus Christ, why do you have to be so combative and attacking me? I wasn't directing my roll eyes at you or anyone in particular.

[retailguy]

Yes, some fans do think a name guy is better than anyone on our roster. Who the hell loves Bulger? Some guys talked about getting a vet QB and this was the only one I thought of as a back-up worth discussing, nothing more. At least I brought up a name. I still can't think of any LB that is worth consideration. I like Flynn and I think TT truly found a steal in that draft with him. Are you this charming in real life? Jesus Christ, why do you have to be so combative and attacking me? I wasn't directing my roll eyes at you or anyone in particular.

Gee, I don't know, I guess since I was the only person advocating a "named FA" in the whole damn thread, that was a pretty good clue you were talking to me. I'd love to hear who else you "might" have been refering to if it wasn't me?

I am always "charming" when someone nitpicks me for stupid reasons and then 5 days later does the same damn thing, and suddenly "can't remember" their previous attacks. Quite honestly I could say the same thing about you, with your well worded reply in the other thread. But somehow, I am sure, "piling on" is more socially acceptable here that would enable you to forget, then be reminded, and still have the "audacity" to be indignant. Priceless.

When you ask the questions you ask, perhaps you should hold up a mirror and take a good hard look, huh?

[bobblehead]

Flynn deserves a chance, and he's old enough now to be a competent backup QB. I was on this train when he was the backup as a rookie, and then to a certain extent last year. But now? He damn well better be ready to play. A "name free agent" QB should not be necessary.

Agree 100%...if he isn't ready to be a BACKUP at this point we might as well cut him and start over.



As to LB, I think when you dislike your available backups so much that you won't start them when your starter gets injured, and instead you start a rookie with ZERO experience, it's a damning statement related to those backups. We can't find anyone to replace them except a street rookie free agent? Really? That makes no sense to me. That's why I think the available LB'ers are viable choices, because it is abundantly clear we really don't trust the guys we got.

I disagree....the rookie was the backup at THAT position. Chillar had worked at inside all offseason, as had Bishop. Poppinga isn't a fit at all for this D and likely is gone soon...he is good on ST so he might stick this year yet. Jones had 4 years in that D (college) and is balanced if not spectacular...he filled in well and made a very nice backup. The biggest mistake with LB last year was that we had just signed Poppinga as a decent 4-3 strong side LB and good ST guy and were stuck with him for a year. He wasn't able to ever get good enough in coverage to play OLB in the 3-4 though.

As far as DRAFTING a guy late in the draft, TT obviously saw all the talent as pretty equal and knew that among the 7-8 he might have "liked" (relative term) that he could get any of them after the draft. He also has guys like Obiozor coming back that he may feel are as likely to impress as anyone he could have drafted in the 5-7th rounds.

He might not be done yet, he likely will bring in 2 FA OLB that we never heard of not named AT but guys around 27 years old who actually have pro experience and may or may not help, but won't cost a dime to cut.

[retailguy]

An uncapped year is the perfect time to better align your roster with your scheme. Poppinga has limited value to us, as evidenced by his inability to get on the field in this scheme.

That's a good example of what I'm talking about.

Jarrett Bush is another. Yes, he's the #5 corner. Yes, there are reasons for that. But somewhere, there is someone that is both more appropriate for the scheme, and someone who is also capable on special teams.

Those guys do not have to come as undrafted rookie free agents. They could come on one year contracts to "fill a gap" until a player can be drafted. We don't "fill gaps" any longer. We live with the holes. While that works some of the time, I wonder if it is the difference between a good team and a championship team. I honestly don't know the answer to it, but I certainly consider the argument.

[ThunderDan]

Goodell has stated that there won't be a cap "break" if people go wild this year to win in future years if a cap is agreed to in the new CBA. Teams will have to get back in line with a the cap if 2011 is played.

And what team has done this? Maybe the NY Jets? All the other teams have been releasing high paid veterans to avoid the cap hit in this uncapped year. I would be surprised if total 2010 player salaries match 2009 salaries.

[retailguy]

Goodell has stated that there won't be a cap "break" if people go wild this year to win in future years if a cap is agreed to in the new CBA. Teams will have to get back in line with a the cap if 2011 is played.

And what team has done this? Maybe the NY Jets? All the other teams have been releasing high paid veterans to avoid the cap hit in this uncapped year. I would be surprised if total 2010 player salaries match 2009 salaries.

That isn't my point, and you know that. Dumping a salary like Poppinga's and looking for a backup LB that fits the scheme and plays special teams is NOT going to alter the cap in a meaningful way.

No where did I advocate spending money foolishly. there is a balance here, that can rid your team of unproductive and misplaced talent.

[bobblehead]

Goodell has stated that there won't be a cap "break" if people go wild this year to win in future years if a cap is agreed to in the new CBA. Teams will have to get back in line with a the cap if 2011 is played.

And what team has done this? Maybe the NY Jets? All the other teams have been releasing high paid veterans to avoid the cap hit in this uncapped year. I would be surprised if total 2010 player salaries match 2009 salaries.

That isn't my point, and you know that. Dumping a salary like Poppinga's and looking for a backup LB that fits the scheme and plays special teams is NOT going to alter the cap in a meaningful way.

No where did I advocate spending money foolishly. there is a balance here, that can rid your team of unproductive and misplaced talent.

I agree Retail...and I said I find it unlikely Poppinga lasts this camp.

And bush wasn't the 5th CB he was the 6th. He also is probably better suited for this scheme than the former one. He can't locate the ball with his back to the line of scrimmage.

[Pugger]

Yes, some fans do think a name guy is better than anyone on our roster. Who the hell loves Bulger? Some guys talked about getting a vet QB and this was the only one I thought of as a back-up worth discussing, nothing more. At least I brought up a name. I still can't think of any LB that is worth consideration. I like Flynn and I think TT truly found a steal in that draft with him. Are you this charming in real life? Jesus Christ, why do you have to be so combative and attacking me? I wasn't directing my roll eyes at you or anyone in particular.

Gee, I don't know, I guess since I was the only person advocating a "named FA" in the whole damn thread, that was a pretty good clue you were talking to me. I'd love to hear who else you "might" have been refering to if it wasn't me?

I am always "charming" when someone nitpicks me for stupid reasons and then 5 days later does the same damn thing, and suddenly "can't remember" their previous attacks. Quite honestly I could say the same thing about you, with your well worded reply in the other thread. But somehow, I am sure, "piling on" is more socially acceptable here that would enable you to forget, then be reminded, and still have the "audacity" to be indignant. Priceless.

When you ask the questions you ask, perhaps you should hold up a mirror and take a good hard look, huh?

Well, excuse me all to hell. All I did earlier is ask what anyone thought of a FA QB and you jumped all over my ass. I'll have to remember who to have a debate with and who likes to attack people on an Internet forum if they aren't perfect.

[Pugger]

Double post - my bad. :oops:

[RashanGary]

I understand Retail guy's point. I don't know that it's all that profound or particularly damning to Thompson though. A very easy arguement could be made that Scott Pioli, of the Colts; Kevin Colbert, of the Steelers and Rick Spielman, of the Vikings, could all have made free agent moves at what turned out to be the worst positions in the season, that would have gotten them over the top.

I think it's nit picking a little.



As far as Retails comment that there is no excuse not to win the SB this year. . . There was no excuse for Pioli to not win it last year. What does that mean for him that he didn't win? What does it mean for him that he probably won't win it this year either?

I'm a big advocate of judging a GM on the big picture. The big picture is we have a ton of young talent, maybe more great young talent and good young talent than any team in the league. Our cap financial situation is fantastic. I like our chances to win a SB this year and every year for the next several. . .With that big picture outlook in mind, I'm a big advocate of the job Thompson has done and is doing. I've yet to hear a convincing arguement that the big picture outlook of this team is anything but really good or great. I've heard some minor nit picks though.

[retailguy]

Well, excuse me all to hell. I'll have to remember who to have a debate with and who likes to attack people on an Internet forum if they aren't perfect.

Let me help a little bit. Here is an example of an "attack post". You could model your behavior after this person. If you PM'ed her, she could probably explain how to continue to be "indignant" long after she should have just admitted that her original post was "a little over the top".


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.

http://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=20577

[retailguy]

I understand Retail guy's point. I don't know that it's all that profound or particularly damning to Thompson though. A very easy arguement could be made that Scott Pioli, of the Colts; Kevin Colbert, of the Steelers and Rick Spielman, of the Vikings, could all have made free agent moves at what turned out to be the worst positions in the season, that would have gotten them over the top.

I think it's nit picking a little.



As far as Retails comment that there is no excuse not to win the SB this year. . . There was no excuse for Pioli to not win it last year. What does that mean for him that he didn't win? What does it mean for him that he probably won't win it this year either?

I'm a big advocate of judging a GM on the big picture. The big picture is we have a ton of young talent, maybe more great young talent and good young talent than any team in the league. Our cap financial situation is fantastic. I like our chances to win a SB this year and every year for the next several. . .With that big picture outlook in mind, I'm a big advocate of the job Thompson has done and is doing. I've yet to hear a convincing arguement that the big picture outlook of this team is anything but really good or great. I've heard some minor nit picks though.

Common ground? Perhaps.

I wasn't intending to bash 'ol Ted, just merely explaining that I understand the article questioning his FA activity.

I would tell you that the expectations are slightly higher for Ted then they are for Pioli. Bad comparison, if you ask me. There are much better comparisons than the guy who is 2 years into a massive rebuilding project, who inherited one of the 5 worst teams in the league. He has it much tougher than Ted ever did.

Ted has assembled his roster, his way. There aren't any more excuses, Justin. He needs to win, and he should win. By every analysis, even mine, (and I hate the guy), this team should win.

The last time we said that was the beginning of 2008 and that didn't work out so well. There shouldn't be a repeat, and Justin, I want you to know that I share your exhuberence. This team is stacked at most positions. there are very few holes. There should be very few excuses. It should be a championship season.

[Tarlam!]

I love this board. Until it starts getting personal.

[Lurker64]

Rent, what do you mean by "this team should win"? Win the division? Ted's done that. Win 11 or 13 games? Ted's done that too. He's got "win the NFC" and "win the superbowl" on his list of things yet to do, but there are never any guarantees when it comes to the playoffs. The best team regularly fails to win the superbowl on any given year. Hell, it's incredibly rare for the two best teams to actually meet in the playoffs.

When you assemble a roster that's capable of being the best in the league and/or winning the superbowl, the GM's job is basically done. The actual on the field stuff comes down to a lot of luck, execution, and coaching none of which is really the province of the GM.

[retailguy]

Rent, what do you mean by "this team should win"? Win the division? Ted's done that. Win 11 or 13 games? Ted's done that too. He's got "win the NFC" and "win the superbowl" on his list of things yet to do, but there are never any guarantees when it comes to the playoffs. The best team regularly fails to win the superbowl on any given year. Hell, it's incredibly rare for the two best teams to actually meet in the playoffs.

When you assemble a roster that's capable of being the best in the league and/or winning the superbowl, the GM's job is basically done. The actual on the field stuff comes down to a lot of luck, execution, and coaching none of which is really the province of the GM.

Well, this is kind of my point Lurker. At some point, if you are truly successful, you've got to get "over the top". In the other thread there was criticism of the JSO for talking about Ted and FA.

In thinking about it, we've got a few holes, that for a couple of seasons now we haven't patched. I openly wondered if those "holes" would be enough to keep this team from going over the top. And I don't know the answer to that.

That led me to thinking about the difference between Wolf and Thompson. During the 96 season, Wolf shuffled a lot of personnel, and this year Thompson has done just the opposite.

It is an interesting comparison, that will be fun to watch play out. And I agree, anything less than the NFC championship should be a failure. This team, when compared to other teams (with the homer glasses on or off, I don't care) should be able to win it all.

That's what Justin and others have promised for 3 years running now. I believe that this is the year of which they have been speaking.

[Guiness]

re: Bulger et. al. (can Testaverde be pried off the couch?)
I wouldn't be bothered to see him sitting there as the 3rd QB. Would be nice insurance this year.

Question is, are we better having a 3rd QB, or a 10th OL? *shrugs*

[DonHutson]

I like having one backup QB who's solid enough to salvage a game or two, and another who's a young guy with a chance to improve.

Lucky for the Packers they have both of those in one person right now. Saves a roster spot that can be used elsewhere.

[Packers4Ever]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Falcons-wide-receiver-Roddy-White-poised-for-100-catches-051510

It is such a leap of faith to say that if GB, or any team really, lost its starting QB the season could suck...WOW...insight abound!



Should we all freak out now or wait and start the hunt for an extra QB
closer to opening day? :lol:

[MichiganPackerFan]

I love this board. Until it starts getting personal.

This is usually the point where I jump in with a "go f yourself" post, but last time i did that I actually got involved with real, actual work and didn't respond in time to confirm that it was humor only :oops:

Can't wait until training camp gets into full swing and we get to take our shiny new 2010 model out for a test drive.