Concerns for 2010 (No Particular Order)

[rbaloha1]

1. ILB next to Barnett. Bishop is not the answer. Can Chillar play an entire season at this position? Can Hawk start forcing turnovers? Is Hawk second team?

2. Tramon Williams. Obviously the dude is going to be picked-on. Against better receivers he is consistently beat.

3. Nickel db. Maybe its Shields. Underwood makes too many mistakes. Lee is okay but has not stepped-up.

4. Backup to Grant. Jackson gets hurt and fumbles. The other 2 are unproven in the regular season.

5. Returners except for Blackmon.

Omissions or deletions?

[gbgary]

pass rush...a good pass rush can make up a lot for an iffy secondary.

[falco]

2. Tramon Williams. Obviously the dude is going to be picked-on. Against better receivers he is consistently beat.

-1. Tramon is not Woodson or Harris, but he is starting quality. Any CB is going to get beat now and then.

I think his play this preseason has been spotty, but I think he will be fine this year. The 3rd CB is more of a concern, IMO.

[pbmax]

Right now, the Chillar/Hawk depth chart seems the same as last year. While he didn't come on until the second half versus the Colts, they played nickel as their base versus Manning in the first half.

If a team is a threat to run, Hawk will get the start in base. If the team is pass dominated, it'll be Chillar and the nickel.

The only reason for concern is that neither seems to make big plays. They play solid and not much else.

[Brandon494]

2. Tramon Williams. Obviously the dude is going to be picked-on. Against better receivers he is consistently beat.

-1. Tramon is not Woodson or Harris, but he is starting quality. Any CB is going to get beat now and then.

I think his play this preseason has been spotty, but I think he will be fine this year. The 3rd CB is more of a concern, IMO.

I disagree, I like Tramon but he is not starting quality. He is a nickel back who can start a few games but not someone you want as a starter for awhole season.

[pbmax]

McCarthy named Colledge the starter at Left Guard (just for Philly?). Not a shock, esp. given Bulaga's injury, but Daryn has shown some of the same ability to be beat that he has always demonstrated. He doesn't seem to have taken a new step forward, but perhaps he is back to his 2008 form, rather than the first half of 2009 form.

And this is how confusion happens (from practice today):

Tom Silverstein:
JSO Live Blog (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/101750568.html)[/b]]Twitter TomSilverstein:
Here's an odd sight: Breno Giacomini at RG. Not a good sign for his chances of making team. [via Twitter]
Sunday August 29, 2010 12:24 TomSilverstein

Twitter TomSilverstein:
Sorry I goofed Giacomini at RG was scout team. No significance. [via Twitter]


Press Gazetter's Vandesauce and Demovsky:
Press Gazette Live Blog (http://packersnews.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20100829/PKR01/308290122/Updates-from-today-s-practice)[/b]]Twitter RobDemovsky:
TJ Lang at left tackle with the starters. He had been a right side guy all camp. [via Twitter]
Sunday August 29, 2010 12:21 RobDemovsky


Twitter MikeVandermause:
Giacomini working at right guard in team run. Not a good sign for him that Lang lining up at right tackle with No. 2s. [via Twitter]

Who is right? Stay tuned*. McGinn will sort it out.

* OK, who wants to wait. Silverstein probably overcorrected. It was the scout team so being at Guard wasn't a big deal, but being moved from #2 RT for Lang would be. Esp. on a day Lang also was at LT.

[rbaloha1]

McCarthy named Colledge the starter at Left Guard (just for Philly?). Not a shock, esp. given Bulaga's injury, but Daryn has shown some of the same ability to be beat that he has always demonstrated. He doesn't seem to have taken a new step forward, but perhaps he is back to his 2008 form, rather than the first half of 2009 form.

And this is how confusion happens (from practice today):

Tom Silverstein:
JSO Live Blog (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/101750568.html)[/b]]Twitter TomSilverstein:
Here's an odd sight: Breno Giacomini at RG. Not a good sign for his chances of making team. [via Twitter]
Sunday August 29, 2010 12:24 TomSilverstein

Twitter TomSilverstein:
Sorry I goofed Giacomini at RG was scout team. No significance. [via Twitter]


Press Gazetter's Vandesauce and Demovsky:
Press Gazette Live Blog (http://packersnews.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20100829/PKR01/308290122/Updates-from-today-s-practice)[/b]]Twitter RobDemovsky:
TJ Lang at left tackle with the starters. He had been a right side guy all camp. [via Twitter]
Sunday August 29, 2010 12:21 RobDemovsky


Twitter MikeVandermause:
Giacomini working at right guard in team run. Not a good sign for him that Lang lining up at right tackle with No. 2s. [via Twitter]

Who is right? Stay tuned*. McGinn will sort it out.

* OK, who wants to wait. Silverstein probably overcorrected. It was the scout team so being at Guard wasn't a big deal, but being moved from #2 RT for Lang would be. Esp. on a day Lang also was at LT.

Colledge has played well and earned the starting spot. Should he fail the backups are good.

[RashanGary]

Injuries
Health
Injuries
and
Injuries

[rbaloha1]

2. Tramon Williams. Obviously the dude is going to be picked-on. Against better receivers he is consistently beat.

-1. Tramon is not Woodson or Harris, but he is starting quality. Any CB is going to get beat now and then.

I think his play this preseason has been spotty, but I think he will be fine this year. The 3rd CB is more of a concern, IMO.

I disagree, I like Tramon but he is not starting quality. He is a nickel back who can start a few games but not someone you want as a starter for awhole season.

Agreed. TW is easily beat by double moves.

[falco]

I couldn't disagree more about TWill. He started the second half of last season and didn't give up big plays. The problem is that if TWill is starting, the third CB becomes an immediate target.

[Tarlam!]

I couldn't disagree more about TWill. He started the second half of last season and didn't give up big plays. The problem is that if TWill is starting, the third CB becomes an immediate target.

This is how I remember it from last season, too.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Hawk/Chillar, Williams, and return man are three of your five biggest concerns?

My biggest concerns (in no particular order):

1) Nickelback. None of the guys look ready.
2) OLB. I had hopes for Jones, but he's been injured. Also concerned about Clay's hammy.
3) DL depth. I like the top four with Jenkins, Pickett, Raji, and Neal. I think Harrell has been decent, but will he stay healthy? Unlikely.
4) Special teams--mainly the coverage teams and the holder.

[rbaloha1]

Hawk/Chillar, Williams, and return man are three of your five biggest concerns?

My biggest concerns (in no particular order):

1) Nickelback. None of the guys look ready.

Agreed and Noted.

2) OLB. I had hopes for Jones, but he's been injured. Also concerned about Clay's hammy.

Expect both healthy and ready for game 1.

3) DL depth. I like the top four with Jenkins, Pickett, Raji, and Neal. I think Harrell has been decent, but will he stay healthy? Unlikely.

The lower draft picks are playing decent and can probably hold gaps. Harrell needs to get in better condition.

4) Special teams--mainly the coverage teams and the holder.

Coverage is improving but still a slight concern. Holder looked fine against the Colts.

[Tony Oday]

Hawk will be a stud this year...grab the pencil and paper and write that down

[ND72]

1. ILB next to Barnett. Bishop is not the answer. Can Chillar play an entire season at this position? Can Hawk start forcing turnovers? Is Hawk second team?

2. Tramon Williams. Obviously the dude is going to be picked-on. Against better receivers he is consistently beat.

3. Nickel db. Maybe its Shields. Underwood makes too many mistakes. Lee is okay but has not stepped-up.

4. Backup to Grant. Jackson gets hurt and fumbles. The other 2 are unproven in the regular season.

5. Returners except for Blackmon.

Omissions or deletions?


Hawk will be starting at ILB, he didn't play until 2nd half vs. colts to "save" him because he's a little banged up right now. He's fine. His role isn't to force turnovers on this defense anymore, it's as a lead block stuffer, that's his ILB position. Barnett is meant to make the tackles.

Not worried about Williams

Not worried about Underwood

Not worried about Jackson

Kind of worried about the next returner after blackmon.

[Brandon494]

Hawk will be a stud this year...grab the pencil and paper and write that down

Never heard that before :lol:

[HarveyWallbangers]

I know another thing that isn't a concern, and that's fumbles.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AvvPo9N5.zW.wcnDmuc9_4xDubYF?slug=teamre ports-2010-nfl-gnb

Article starts out with this:


While the Packers’ passing game has been off-the-charts healthy this preseason, the offense has a major flaw to remedy before the start of the season.

But then you realize this:


Grant incidentally will enter the regular season with a career-high streak of 291 carries without a fumble—the longest active streak among NFL backs.

His only fumble in 2009 came on a pass play in a Week 2 loss to the Cincinnati Bengals. Grant’s last fumble by rush was Dec. 28, 2008, against the Detroit Lions.


Jackson was beside himself for a while following his turnover. He didn’t have a lost fumble his first three years in the league.

Hello, now's the time to fumble. These guys have proven throughout the years that fumbling isn't a major concern with them.

[channtheman]

I know another thing that isn't a concern, and that's fumbles.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AvvPo9N5.zW.wcnDmuc9_4xDubYF?slug=teamre ports-2010-nfl-gnb

Article starts out with this:


While the Packers’ passing game has been off-the-charts healthy this preseason, the offense has a major flaw to remedy before the start of the season.

But then you realize this:


Grant incidentally will enter the regular season with a career-high streak of 291 carries without a fumble—the longest active streak among NFL backs.

His only fumble in 2009 came on a pass play in a Week 2 loss to the Cincinnati Bengals. Grant’s last fumble by rush was Dec. 28, 2008, against the Detroit Lions.


Jackson was beside himself for a while following his turnover. He didn’t have a lost fumble his first three years in the league.

Hello, now's the time to fumble. These guys have proven throughout the years that fumbling isn't a major concern with them.

Exactly. Every running back is going to fumble at some point. Might as well get them out of their system in the preseason. It could almost be looked at as a relief that the running backs finally fumbled. Now they are set to not fumble for the regular season. :D

[MichiganPackerFan]

I know there have been a lot of preseason fumbles, but it IS just preseason. Ball security shouldn't be an issue once things start for real.

My only big concern is defending the mid-level passing game. We got torn up there last year.

[bobblehead]

1. ILB next to Barnett. Bishop is not the answer. Can Chillar play an entire season at this position? Can Hawk start forcing turnovers? Is Hawk second team?

2. Tramon Williams. Obviously the dude is going to be picked-on. Against better receivers he is consistently beat.

3. Nickel db. Maybe its Shields. Underwood makes too many mistakes. Lee is okay but has not stepped-up.

4. Backup to Grant. Jackson gets hurt and fumbles. The other 2 are unproven in the regular season.

5. Returners except for Blackmon.

Omissions or deletions?

1) I think the Chillar/Hawk monster is solid, not spectacular.
2) Tramon would start on many teams. Even better, if Harris comes back he is an exceptional nickel.
3) see 2
4) Bjack has 2 career fumbles, and zero lost in over 200 touches. He has missed a couple games, but I don't think its fair to say "he gets hurt". he has played over 11 every season.
5) How many teams have more than one returner?

[mraynrand]

Every team is going to go AZ on the Packers. Not worried about nickel, but terrified about the dime and the middle of the field. Lack of pass rush will make it even worse. There is no way to know at this point if the pass rush will be better this year.

[vince]

1. Pass rush/coverage. They go hand in hand.
2. Matthews' hammy.
3. Finley getting hurt. That would change the dynamic of the offense substantially - perhaps more than Rodgers going down.

[retailguy]

I'm a little surprised by all the "concern" around here. This team is poised on the brink of greatness. Ted has installed his chosen players into each area of this team.

We need to accept the fact that if he thought we needed better players (especially starters) he'd have went out an acquired them.

There is no legitimate reason, especially at this point, for this team not to be successful. We should be competitive in every single game, and quite honestly should win the majority of them.

Every team has holes, after all this is the NFL. Our holes should not preclude us from a championship season!

[HarveyWallbangers]

The shtick is getting old retailguy.

[retailguy]

What is really getting old is listening to you guys tell me for the last 4 years that this team was getting set up and ready, and now, just weeks before we enter the season, hearing the very same people scale back their predictions.

Fretting about Finley getting injured is ridiculous. Fretting about Hawk? Pathetic. He's started for the past 4 seasons, and is solid but not spectacular.

Legitimate concern at the number 3 corner perhaps, but if it was an issue, TED WOULD HAVE SOLVED IT. HE HAS HAD THE WHOLE OFFSEASON. He has therefore assessed that we have adequate personnel to man the position.

As in prior years, our team goes as far as the OL takes us. I believe you, THE PROBLEM IS SOLVED. You have assured me that I will be impressed, and I am watching with great expectation.

[Tarlam!]

Granted, RG, you've kept a consistant viewpoint on this. Still, I can't agree with the hypocracy theory from other posters you seem to have.

And, TT is under enough pressure without having you on his back! :lol:

[falco]

:roll:

[Fritz]

Well, fans aften do fret. I know I do. And I'm a huge Thompson fan. But I do fret. Will the secondary be good enough? Will there be enough pass rush?

But my fretting doesn't mean I don't think Thompson has done a good job. It's just my fretting. And that's kind of the theme of this thread - what are your concerns? I think it's fair to believe in TT and still have concerns about positions on the team.

[falco]

TT has made his share of mistakes, like any GM. One can argue the merits and flaws of his methods. But its unfair to expect any GM to be able to fill every hole each year and make perfect personnel decision everytime. It a continually evolving body of work.

[HarveyWallbangers]

TT has made his share of mistakes, like any GM. One can argue the merits and flaws of his methods. But its unfair to expect any GM to be able to fill every hole each year and make perfect personnel decision everytime. It a continually evolving body of work.

If it was so easy to fill every hole every year, every GM would do it, right? Even Super Bowl champions have holes. It's up to the coaches to compensate. The one thing that neither a GM nor coach can really plan for is an abundance of injuries. I'm talking little nicks here and there, but several injuries to your best players. No matter who you put on the roster, you aren't going to find backups that aren't a significant dropoff from your best players.

[bobblehead]

I'm a little surprised by all the "concern" around here. This team is poised on the brink of greatness. Ted has installed his chosen players into each area of this team.

We need to accept the fact that if he thought we needed better players (especially starters) he'd have went out an acquired them.

There is no legitimate reason, especially at this point, for this team not to be successful. We should be competitive in every single game, and quite honestly should win the majority of them.

Every team has holes, after all this is the NFL. Our holes should not preclude us from a championship season!

I know this is sarcasm but /sarcasm off and I agree 100%. Will we win it all...can never guarantee that, but competitive all the way and win the majority....absolutely.

[Bossman641]

1. ILB next to Barnett. Bishop is not the answer. Can Chillar play an entire season at this position? Can Hawk start forcing turnovers? Is Hawk second team?

2. Tramon Williams. Obviously the dude is going to be picked-on. Against better receivers he is consistently beat.

3. Nickel db. Maybe its Shields. Underwood makes too many mistakes. Lee is okay but has not stepped-up.

4. Backup to Grant. Jackson gets hurt and fumbles. The other 2 are unproven in the regular season.

5. Returners except for Blackmon.

Omissions or deletions?


Hawk will be starting at ILB, he didn't play until 2nd half vs. colts to "save" him because he's a little banged up right now. He's fine. His role isn't to force turnovers on this defense anymore, it's as a lead block stuffer, that's his ILB position. Barnett is meant to make the tackles.

Is that really why Hawk didn't play in the 1st half? I thought it was because the Packers sat in nickel and dime all half to match up with the Colts.

[sharpe1027]

What is really getting old is listening to you guys tell me for the last 4 years that this team was getting set up and ready, and now, just weeks before we enter the season, hearing the very same people scale back their predictions.

Fretting about Finley getting injured is ridiculous. Fretting about Hawk? Pathetic. He's started for the past 4 seasons, and is solid but not spectacular.

Legitimate concern at the number 3 corner perhaps, but if it was an issue, TED WOULD HAVE SOLVED IT. HE HAS HAD THE WHOLE OFFSEASON. He has therefore assessed that we have adequate personnel to man the position.

As in prior years, our team goes as far as the OL takes us. I believe you, THE PROBLEM IS SOLVED. You have assured me that I will be impressed, and I am watching with great expectation.

Solving potential personnel issues only requires identifying them as potential issues. It is as simple as that, no need to consider whether or not there are adequate solutions in the free agency or draft. Just find the potential issues then it is a simple matter of signing those players refusing to sign for other teams just in case GreenBay decides to ask them to play. I mean, HE HAD THE WHOLE OFFSEASON, so clearly there is no reason not to have starter quality backups at every position.

Also, it is pretty obvious that there's never any mistakes made in predicting how well a player transitions to the NFL or how much they will improve over previous years. Frankly, I am astounded that any team ever loses a game. This GM thing is a piece of cake, ever team should go 16-0 every year. That's my prediction for this year, every team in the league goes 16-0.

[pbmax]

So if I have stood up for Thompson and think him good at his job, to be consistent I must believe its Super Bowl this year. Anything else is a disappointment and a repudiation of all that I believe as a Thompson supporter?

Seems entirely reasonable to me.

[retailguy]

TT has made his share of mistakes, like any GM. One can argue the merits and flaws of his methods. But its unfair to expect any GM to be able to fill every hole each year and make perfect personnel decision everytime. It a continually evolving body of work.

If it was so easy to fill every hole every year, every GM would do it, right? Even Super Bowl champions have holes. It's up to the coaches to compensate. The one thing that neither a GM nor coach can really plan for is an abundance of injuries. I'm talking little nicks here and there, but several injuries to your best players. No matter who you put on the roster, you aren't going to find backups that aren't a significant dropoff from your best players.

I made that comment in the context of the 3rd Cornerback. Harris was injured MID SEASON LAST YEAR. It was not a surprise. It was not a shock. We all witnessed what happened in AZ. It was predictable that day that teams would expose that weakness this season.

Ted did not address the problem in any way shape or form outside of the walls of Lambeau. It is reasonable to conclude from that, one of two things, A. - He did not view it as a problem, or B. - he believed that the talent level in the building would address the issue.

It is further not reasonable to assume that Ted was "unable" to fill a 3rd cornerback position. It isn't like the "goal" was to replace Woodson. Or even Harris. Williams is as good a fill in as exists in the NFL. We're filling a PART TIME position. Depth that actually PLAYS.

But all of you are concerned about the 3rd cornerback. I'm saying Ted IS NOT concerned, or he'd have done something. Therefore, I shouldn't be concerned, so I'm dismissing it.

No sarcasm, hypocrisy, or other drama.

[retailguy]

So if I have stood up for Thompson and think him good at his job, to be consistent I must believe its Super Bowl this year. Anything else is a disappointment and a repudiation of all that I believe as a Thompson supporter?

Seems entirely reasonable to me.

Bullshit.

[retailguy]

I'm a little surprised by all the "concern" around here. This team is poised on the brink of greatness. Ted has installed his chosen players into each area of this team.

We need to accept the fact that if he thought we needed better players (especially starters) he'd have went out an acquired them.

There is no legitimate reason, especially at this point, for this team not to be successful. We should be competitive in every single game, and quite honestly should win the majority of them.

Every team has holes, after all this is the NFL. Our holes should not preclude us from a championship season!

I know this is sarcasm but /sarcasm off and I agree 100%. Will we win it all...can never guarantee that, but competitive all the way and win the majority....absolutely.

Relating to the Packers and their performance on the field, my post was ABSOLUTELY NOT SARCASM.

It is the year. I believe that.

If you look at every position on this team, the person filling the role was handpicked by Ted Thompson. Every position except Barnett and Clifton, has been "challenged" during Ted's regime. He either resigned the existing starter, or brought in his own person. The depth on this team is entirely Thompson's doing.

Now, watching those who for the past FOUR years touted Ted's GENIUS work ethic, his "can do no wrong" moves, his quiet "passion" for the GM position, start to back off their bold predictions, it is HILARIOUS.

Finley getting injured? REALLY? You've got to fucking kidding me. We have FOUR tight ends. We have a very strong WR corps. We've got (according to them) a TOP 5 NFL running back.

On the defense, we have Dom Capers, who is the second coming of Christ. We have two solid nose tackles, a stellar DE who has some injury problems, the returning ROY from the past 10 games of last season, two solid ILB's, and the DPOY at corner. We have the worlds best 3rd round draft pick, playing with a 4th year pro bowl starter, and a nickle back holding a corner spot until our other pro bowl corner returns.

So what are we talking about?

Finely getting hurt.
Hawk underachieving.
our nickle and dime corners.
and our fucking holder.

ARE YOU SERIOUS? :roll: :P

You have got to be fucking kidding me. The holder!

[RashanGary]

Retail, I don't think very many people are taking your seriously. Back off the ledge, dude.

[retailguy]

Retail, I don't think very many people are taking your seriously. Back off the ledge, dude.

This makes absolutely no sense.

[sharpe1027]

I made that comment in the context of the 3rd Cornerback. Harris was injured MID SEASON LAST YEAR. It was not a surprise. It was not a shock. We all witnessed what happened in AZ. It was predictable that day that teams would expose that weakness this season.

Ted did not address the problem in any way shape or form outside of the walls of Lambeau. It is reasonable to conclude from that, one of two things, A. - He did not view it as a problem, or B. - he believed that the talent level in the building would address the issue.

It is further not reasonable to assume that Ted was "unable" to fill a 3rd cornerback position. It isn't like the "goal" was to replace Woodson. Or even Harris. Williams is as good a fill in as exists in the NFL. We're filling a PART TIME position. Depth that actually PLAYS.

But all of you are concerned about the 3rd cornerback. I'm saying Ted IS NOT concerned, or he'd have done something. Therefore, I shouldn't be concerned, so I'm dismissing it.

No sarcasm, hypocrisy, or other drama.

Or C. He saw more value in shoring up other positions.
Or D. There weren't any nickel DBs available that were certain to pan, anymore than the guys they already had.
Or E. He successfully went after a guy like Shields, that might be good enough to fill in.
Or F. Harris is/was expected to be back early.
Or G. He tried to go after a few guys and failed, but it wasn't made public.
Or H. He wasn't concerned until the current set of guys didn't improve as much as he was expecting and now he is more concerned.
Or I. He is eyeing up a few potential cuts or trades from other teams.
Or J. Any combination of A-I.

I probably missed somethings in there. I have to disagree that the ONLY possible conclusion that can be reached is that TT has zero concern whatsoever for the DB position.

TT probably has some concerned about every single position on the roster. It is his job.

[retailguy]

Well, your post settles it then.

2-14, here we come. :roll:


How about

'Z' - We're fine there! or "We've got some depth that can play".

The things you guys are talking about in this thread are not "issues", they're excuses.

[pbmax]

Ted has installed his chosen players into each area of this team.
Sorry RG, but when I read chosen, in my head you are making finger quotes and rolling your eyes. I also cannot believe that you still think OL is the biggest concern for the team.

[sharpe1027]

Now, watching those who for the past FOUR years touted Ted's GENIUS work ethic, his "can do no wrong" moves, his quiet "passion" for the GM position, start to back off their bold predictions, it is HILARIOUS.


IMHO, that is not representative of the current topic or most posters' statements regarding TT. Genius is almost always thrown about by people making straw man arguments, not by people on the other side. This thread is about concerns, it is not about "backing off" of anything. It is entirely reasonable for people to have concerns about their team, even when they expect them to succeed.

[sharpe1027]

Well, your post settles it then.

2-14, here we come. :roll:


How about

'Z' - We're fine there! or "We've got some depth that can play".

The things you guys are talking about in this thread are not "issues", they're excuses.

Your shoving words into people's mouths.

[falco]

When did RetailGuy and JustinHarrell trade personas?? :?:

[falco]

The things you guys are talking about in this thread are not "issues", they're excuses.

This might be a long shot, but perhaps its just packer fans discussing things they are worried about this year, and not a conspiracy of people hedging their bets for when you try to make them eat crow???

[retailguy]

Ted has installed his chosen players into each area of this team.
Sorry RG, but when I read chosen, in my head you are making finger quotes and rolling your eyes. I also cannot believe that you still think OL is the biggest concern for the team.

Whether you have finger quotes or not isn't the point.

He's done rebuilding! It's done. It's over. They're back. There will ALWAYS be roster moves, because people get old and injured.

When you finish the rebuilding, you win. That's the way it works. Every position has been scrutinized, analyzed and discussed in these rooms.

Every single Ted selection has been defended, and sometimes, criticized.

Point is, "we got the team we have". Ted built it. He believes we can win, so let's stop talking about excuses and play the damn games.

The season you all told me was coming IS beginning. There are no reasons it should not be successful. There are no reasons that we won't be playing a game, in Dallas in February.

This team is ready. You all have told me that, and I believe you. Whether there are "air quotes" or not.

The OL has been this teams achilles heel for the past 3 seasons. It has been the driving factor to slow starts the past two years. It will be the driving factor to a slow start this year too. We go as far as the OL goes. Our biggest asset stands behind that OL. It is of the ultimate importance.

[retailguy]

Well, your post settles it then.

2-14, here we come. :roll:


How about

'Z' - We're fine there! or "We've got some depth that can play".

The things you guys are talking about in this thread are not "issues", they're excuses.

Your shoving words into people's mouths.

Just a suggestion - Maybe you should re-read your posts from the past two years? That's the way it works around here. You don't like it? TOUGH SHIT.

[retailguy]

Now, watching those who for the past FOUR years touted Ted's GENIUS work ethic, his "can do no wrong" moves, his quiet "passion" for the GM position, start to back off their bold predictions, it is HILARIOUS.


IMHO, that is not representative of the current topic or most posters' statements regarding TT. Genius is almost always thrown about by people making straw man arguments, not by people on the other side. This thread is about concerns, it is not about "backing off" of anything. It is entirely reasonable for people to have concerns about their team, even when they expect them to succeed.

And if the biggest "concerns" (air quotes) we have are the 3rd cornerback and the holder we're in pretty great shape! (aren't we?)

[retailguy]

The things you guys are talking about in this thread are not "issues", they're excuses.

This might be a long shot, but perhaps its just packer fans discussing things they are worried about this year, and not a conspiracy of people hedging their bets for when you try to make them eat crow???

Of course you MUST be right. You're ALWAYS right.

It also could be a bunch of chicken littles too, but let's dismiss that. After all, you never know when a refrigerator might fall from the sky and kill Finley. Then we'd be fucked you know.

[sharpe1027]

Well, your post settles it then.

2-14, here we come. :roll:


How about

'Z' - We're fine there! or "We've got some depth that can play".

The things you guys are talking about in this thread are not "issues", they're excuses.

Your shoving words into people's mouths.

Just a suggestion - Maybe you should re-read your posts from the past two years? That's the way it works around here. You don't like it? TOUGH SHIT.

Feel free to find my posts saying TT is a genius. Go nuts trying finding me saying they'll be unstoppable this year and then backing off of that. Short of that, you are full of shit.

[retailguy]

When did RetailGuy and JustinHarrell trade personas?? :?:

Father Justin been preaching at me fa years brotha. I believe him. I do. Cant you see the light! It's damn bright!!! Jesus is coming! and bringin' a Supa Bowl title back to GB. You just watch my brotha! February is coming and so is SB #4 for the GB Packers!

Ted for President! (Hell, Ted for DICTATOR!)

[retailguy]

Well, your post settles it then.

2-14, here we come. :roll:


How about

'Z' - We're fine there! or "We've got some depth that can play".

The things you guys are talking about in this thread are not "issues", they're excuses.

Your shoving words into people's mouths.

Just a suggestion - Maybe you should re-read your posts from the past two years? That's the way it works around here. You don't like it? TOUGH SHIT.

Feel free to find my posts saying TT is a genius. Go nuts trying finding me saying they'll be unstoppable this year and then backing off of that. Short of that, you are full of shit.

:P Whatever dude.

[sharpe1027]

:P Whatever dude.

Thought so. :lol:

[Tarlam!]

RG, what is your message?

TT is a failure if they don't win it all this year? Sorry, but that's very closed minded.

[Fritz]

Ted has installed his chosen players into each area of this team.
Sorry RG, but when I read chosen, in my head you are making finger quotes and rolling your eyes. I also cannot believe that you still think OL is the biggest concern for the team.

Whether you have finger quotes or not isn't the point.

He's done rebuilding! It's done. It's over. They're back. There will ALWAYS be roster moves, because people get old and injured.

When you finish the rebuilding, you win. That's the way it works. Every position has been scrutinized, analyzed and discussed in these rooms.

Every single Ted selection has been defended, and sometimes, criticized.

Point is, "we got the team we have". Ted built it. He believes we can win, so let's stop talking about excuses and play the damn games.

The season you all told me was coming IS beginning. There are no reasons it should not be successful. There are no reasons that we won't be playing a game, in Dallas in February.

This team is ready. You all have told me that, and I believe you. Whether there are "air quotes" or not.

The OL has been this teams achilles heel for the past 3 seasons. It has been the driving factor to slow starts the past two years. It will be the driving factor to a slow start this year too. We go as far as the OL goes. Our biggest asset stands behind that OL. It is of the ultimate importance.

Just as players get testy after training camp has dragged on and the season has yet to begin, so do fans. We are ready for the season to begin. Thus, we while away the time by querying each other about who will be the surprise player this year, who will be most improved, what our weaknesses might be, and so on.

The fans need the games to begin too, it seems. I'm excited for the season and this team. I'm feeling some trepidation about the defense, but I am hopeful that the team will not suffer too many injuries and that the defense will come together.

[pbmax]

The OL has been this teams achilles heel for the past 3 seasons. It has been the driving factor to slow starts the past two years. It will be the driving factor to a slow start this year too. We go as far as the OL goes. Our biggest asset stands behind that OL. It is of the ultimate importance.
I disagree. We go as far as the defense goes. Injuries could change that calculus, but that is how I see it now.

And while I like the Left Tackle depth, the new safety and DE, this year's version of the team has a repeat of a question that was asked last year: How will the starting CB hold up?

Last year we were worried about scheme. This year, health.

[pbmax]

RG, what is your message?

TT is a failure if they don't win it all this year? Sorry, but that's very closed minded.
The message (I believe) is a disapproval of Thompson's player acquisition strategy. It has been applied (quite logically to the O line in years past) this year to find cause for concern at CB.

Essentially, RG has used several posts and unintentional sarcasm to declare that the lack of another starting/nickel CB is further indication of Thompson's lack of thoroughness, or perhaps, too much trust in his players or coaches.

Those who broach this topic and who have previously defended Thompson are being reminded of just who was right all along.

However, I think he truly finds concern about the holder to be not worthy of a post.

[get louder at lambeau]

You OK, retail? You take your meds? :crazy:

[sharpe1027]

1. ILB next to Barnett. Bishop is not the answer. Can Chillar play an entire season at this position? Can Hawk start forcing turnovers? Is Hawk second team?

2. Tramon Williams. Obviously the dude is going to be picked-on. Against better receivers he is consistently beat.

3. Nickel db. Maybe its Shields. Underwood makes too many mistakes. Lee is okay but has not stepped-up.

4. Backup to Grant. Jackson gets hurt and fumbles. The other 2 are unproven in the regular season.

5. Returners except for Blackmon.

Omissions or deletions?

#1 by a large margin, for me at least, pass rush.

[falco]

1. ILB next to Barnett. Bishop is not the answer. Can Chillar play an entire season at this position? Can Hawk start forcing turnovers? Is Hawk second team?

2. Tramon Williams. Obviously the dude is going to be picked-on. Against better receivers he is consistently beat.

3. Nickel db. Maybe its Shields. Underwood makes too many mistakes. Lee is okay but has not stepped-up.

4. Backup to Grant. Jackson gets hurt and fumbles. The other 2 are unproven in the regular season.

5. Returners except for Blackmon.

Omissions or deletions?

#1 by a large margin, for me at least, pass rush.

Not just pass rush, but pass rush from the OLBs. I think the DL is going to be okay. I think our secondary will be just fine, but not if the QB has all day to throw. Matthews needs to be 100% at week 1, and someone needs to add pressure from the other side. I hope CWood gets to blitz a lot again this year as well.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

The OL has been this teams achilles heel for the past 3 seasons. It has been the driving factor to slow starts the past two years. It will be the driving factor to a slow start this year too. We go as far as the OL goes. Our biggest asset stands behind that OL. It is of the ultimate importance.
I disagree. We go as far as the defense goes. Injuries could change that calculus, but that is how I see it now.

And while I like the Left Tackle depth, the new safety and DE, this year's version of the team has a repeat of a question that was asked last year: How will the starting CB hold up?

Last year we were worried about scheme. This year, health.



Isn't this then a sign that we are a team on the "cusp of greatness"? Generally, once a team feels all of it's holes are filled the remaining question mark seems to be how healthy can they stay?

I have to side with RG, this team can go as far as it wants just as long as they stay healthy.

I believe when the health of the team is our major concern then the Packers as a team are in a great place.

[bobblehead]

I'm a little surprised by all the "concern" around here. This team is poised on the brink of greatness. Ted has installed his chosen players into each area of this team.

We need to accept the fact that if he thought we needed better players (especially starters) he'd have went out an acquired them.

There is no legitimate reason, especially at this point, for this team not to be successful. We should be competitive in every single game, and quite honestly should win the majority of them.

Every team has holes, after all this is the NFL. Our holes should not preclude us from a championship season!

I know this is sarcasm but /sarcasm off and I agree 100%. Will we win it all...can never guarantee that, but competitive all the way and win the majority....absolutely.

Relating to the Packers and their performance on the field, my post was ABSOLUTELY NOT SARCASM.

It is the year. I believe that.

If you look at every position on this team, the person filling the role was handpicked by Ted Thompson. Every position except Barnett and Clifton, has been "challenged" during Ted's regime. He either resigned the existing starter, or brought in his own person. The depth on this team is entirely Thompson's doing.

Now, watching those who for the past FOUR years touted Ted's GENIUS work ethic, his "can do no wrong" moves, his quiet "passion" for the GM position, start to back off their bold predictions, it is HILARIOUS.

Finley getting injured? REALLY? You've got to fucking kidding me. We have FOUR tight ends. We have a very strong WR corps. We've got (according to them) a TOP 5 NFL running back.

On the defense, we have Dom Capers, who is the second coming of Christ. We have two solid nose tackles, a stellar DE who has some injury problems, the returning ROY from the past 10 games of last season, two solid ILB's, and the DPOY at corner. We have the worlds best 3rd round draft pick, playing with a 4th year pro bowl starter, and a nickle back holding a corner spot until our other pro bowl corner returns.

So what are we talking about?

Finely getting hurt.
Hawk underachieving.
our nickle and dime corners.
and our fucking holder.

ARE YOU SERIOUS? :roll: :P

You have got to be fucking kidding me. The holder!

well then, I agree. Our depth is obvious by the performance of the second team in the preseason. I think TT has done a very good job assembling talent. Lsst year I stated that, although I like his method of building a team, if we didn't win 10 games I would be off the bandwagon. I think when it comes to a GM, a winning record and consistent contention is all that matters.

You arguing that he shoud have a better nickel in place is kinda silly. No team is perfect from 1-53, NONE. You name the team, I'll give you a weakness.

Things TT did this year better than last year....brought in Tausch and Cliffy despite their age and challenged anyone to knock them off their perch.

Drafted a good OL in the first round.

Traded up to get a safety because he obviously saw a player of great value at that point in a position of weakness.

Things he didn't do. Improve the nickel other than injury recovery. Improve the OLB other than Jones getting an offseason under his belt.

Its impossible to build an NFL team without a weakness....IMPOSSIBLE. Even before FA it wasn't realistic. Ron Wolf (who I assume you are ok with) struggled year after year to shore up the LT position wasting 2 number ones in the draft. This was in the heyday of FA. The second most important position to an offense and the might Wolf couldn't fix it. (likely TT's fault advising him).

I stand by your post. We will be consistently competitive and win more than we lose...likely 11 or more games. I will only be happy if we make the NFCC, but realistically I'll start with a win in the playoffs.

Rand thinks every team will AZ us, but I ask you....what team has Fitz, Breston and Deucett...oh, and warner. Not many. I won't even get into the 37 illegal picks set by Cardinal recievers in that game (that would be hypocritical for any packer fan from our superbowl win).

[Bossman641]

For the life of me I cannot determine whether RG is genuinely excited about this team's prospects or giddy at the thought that the team might fail to win a super bowl. I am leaning towards #2 though.

I don't understand how posters addressing those areas of the team they are worried about is an indication that TT failed in that area. Every single team in the league has weaknesses and trouble spots. The team that finds a way to win it all hides their weaknesses the most effectively, schemes to expose their opponents' weaknesses, and also benefits from a large amount of luck along the way.

A question for RG though. If I am wrong, and you are genuinely excited about this year's team, isn't that at least some acknowledgment that TT was right over the past few years when you were questioning his moves? I know he probably didn't adress those areas as quickly or effectively enough as you would have wished, but doesn't the overall body of work show that the needle is pointed in the right direction?

That's all I can ask from my GM.

[bobblehead]

There are no reasons it should not be successful. There are no reasons that we won't be playing a game, in Dallas in February.


Now RG....if we were in FYI I would accuse you of building a strawman HH would have been proud of.

Of course there are reasons we won't be playing in the big one....like reason #1, only one team from the NFC will be.

You are pulling a major "tank" move here and raising the bar. You have hammered TT for being incompetent for years, now that ARod is a stud and we won 11 games last season, and its likely we will have a very good year again, suddenly the "bar" is....if we don't win the super bowl TT sucks.

If we win the superbowl this season you will likely be saying we got lucky in covering some holes and TT is only successful if we win it back to back like other "greats" have.

Lets face it. TT has put together a very good team. My guess is that after this season our '09 and '10 wins combined will be top 3 over that span. That alone won't make me happy, but it will prove that TT is a pretty damn good GM.

[retailguy]

RG, what is your message?

TT is a failure if they don't win it all this year? Sorry, but that's very closed minded.
The message (I believe) is a disapproval of Thompson's player acquisition strategy. It has been applied (quite logically to the O line in years past) this year to find cause for concern at CB.

Essentially, RG has used several posts and unintentional sarcasm to declare that the lack of another starting/nickel CB is further indication of Thompson's lack of thoroughness, or perhaps, too much trust in his players or coaches.

Those who broach this topic and who have previously defended Thompson are being reminded of just who was right all along.

However, I think he truly finds concern about the holder to be not worthy of a post.

Umm. No. Not at all.

My message is directed SOLELY at this forum. I am saying nothing different than what was said to me for the past 3 years.

Everytime I raised a concern I was told either I was nuts, or, just wait a few years and it'd go away. Guess what? We're there.

I have no complaints with Ted and personnel selection, I've said that many times. My complaints rest with the rest of the GM job. I don't think he's a strong leader and I think some of his hiring decisions are questionable. His media personna is abysmal, and I really dislike him as an individual.

So, his team, his people, his strong suit (personnel). We should win. I believe that. And I'm not taking any excuses as to why we don't win. As I've said before, if 8 starters go down, like happened in '01? Ok, THEN we talk injuries. Today? No point to these discussions.

You got issues with this team? You're nuts. We're ready to win! 19-0. You heard it here first.

[RashanGary]

Sounds like someone is trying to set up a win win for himself. If the Packers have a great team this year, Thompson is a failure and RG was right all along because this one year he didn't win a SB.

Thompson has this team set up for many years of success. As long as the Packers have a SB competitor this year, he did his job.

Considering what he's taken over, where he's taken it and where it appears to be going. . . . Thompson has done a fantastic job.

Now, the next 5 years will tell whether he wins a SB or not.


RG knows this team is great and knows all of his bitching about the receivers way back when the TE's, the OLB's last year, the RB's when Green left. . . have jsut not come true. Now the nickle spot is the weakest link and in order to look like he knew it all along, he's passing a SB victory or I was right stance.

That's not how it works, man. Everyone can see through it. Everyone knows your track record.

[retailguy]

For the life of me I cannot determine whether RG is genuinely excited about this team's prospects or giddy at the thought that the team might fail to win a super bowl. I am leaning towards #2 though.

I don't understand how posters addressing those areas of the team they are worried about is an indication that TT failed in that area. Every single team in the league has weaknesses and trouble spots. The team that finds a way to win it all hides their weaknesses the most effectively, schemes to expose their opponents' weaknesses, and also benefits from a large amount of luck along the way.

A question for RG though. If I am wrong, and you are genuinely excited about this year's team, isn't that at least some acknowledgment that TT was right over the past few years when you were questioning his moves? I know he probably didn't adress those areas as quickly or effectively enough as you would have wished, but doesn't the overall body of work show that the needle is pointed in the right direction?

That's all I can ask from my GM.

I'd never be "giddy" that the packers would lose. Watching some of the kool aid drinkers here take a bath in their predictions over the past few years? If I could somehow accomplish that without the packers going 2-14, I'D LOVE IT. But that doesn't seem to be possible.

I did not enjoy Ted's path towards "building" this team. Not one day of it. I haven't criticized his personnel skills in a long long time, if ever. I'm critical of ignoring free agency, especially with the lower tier guys. Not much risk there, and might give competition.

I've HATED the lackidasical approach to the OL, absolutely DESPISED it. It has taken far too long to field a competitive squad there. There was no reason for it. I firmly believe that responsibility for the slow starts the past two seasons rest firmly with the OL.

I am excited about what this team should achieve. There is no reason for them not to be in Dallas. It's not a strawman. They are, as good, or better, than any team in the NFC.

If this team does not achieve, then, we have some fundamental flaws in either coaching, gameplan, or org structure. The players are there, and when they face others head to head, I expect them to win.

I find it very funny that folks here are "shocked" that there are "holes" in this team. There are holes in every team. There are comparatively fewer holes here than anywhere else you can name. AROD closes most of those holes. Honestly. We ought to be able to outscore almost any team in the league in any given week, PROVIDED, the OL is at least competitive.

Let the games begin.

[retailguy]

Sounds like someone is trying to set up a win win for himself. If the Packers have a great team this year, Thompson is a failure and RG was right all along because this one year he didn't win a SB.

Thompson has this team set up for many years of success. As long as the Packers have a SB competitor this year, he did his job.

Considering what he's taken over, where he's taken it and where it appears to be going. . . . Thompson has done a fantastic job.

Now, the next 5 years will tell whether he wins a SB or not.


RG knows this team is great and knows all of his bitching about the receivers way back when the TE's, the OLB's last year, the RB's when Green left. . . have jsut not come true. Now the nickle spot is the weakest link and in order to look like he knew it all along, he's passing a SB victory or I was right stance.

That's not how it works, man. Everyone can see through it. Everyone knows your track record.

Sniffing out conspiracy theories is not your strong suit. You should stick to sniffing glue and Ted's anus, because you're out to lunch on this one.

[sharpe1027]

The Packers appear to have a legitimate chance at winning the Superbowl. So do several other teams. Only one can win. If it is not the Packer this year, I'm not going to bitch and moan (too much) as long as they show me that they were good enough to have a legitimate shot. That's my decision and my standards. In the words of RG, if you don't like it "tough shit."

Go Pack!

Back to the thread topic:

I agree that pass rush from the OLBs and DL is going to make a world of difference for this team. If they can get that, getting pressure by blitzing becomes a luxury. Is it absolutely necessary, maybe not, but good QBs ripped apart the D last year. Pressure on the QB is the best pass defense.

[pbmax]

RG, what is your message?

TT is a failure if they don't win it all this year? Sorry, but that's very closed minded.
The message (I believe) is a disapproval of Thompson's player acquisition strategy. It has been applied (quite logically to the O line in years past) this year to find cause for concern at CB.

Essentially, RG has used several posts and unintentional sarcasm to declare that the lack of another starting/nickel CB is further indication of Thompson's lack of thoroughness, or perhaps, too much trust in his players or coaches.

Those who broach this topic and who have previously defended Thompson are being reminded of just who was right all along.

However, I think he truly finds concern about the holder to be not worthy of a post.

Umm. No. Not at all.

My message is directed SOLELY at this forum. I am saying nothing different than what was said to me for the past 3 years.

Everytime I raised a concern I was told either I was nuts, or, just wait a few years and it'd go away. Guess what? We're there.

I have no complaints with Ted and personnel selection, I've said that many times. My complaints rest with the rest of the GM job. I don't think he's a strong leader and I think some of his hiring decisions are questionable. His media personna is abysmal, and I really dislike him as an individual.

So, his team, his people, his strong suit (personnel). We should win. I believe that. And I'm not taking any excuses as to why we don't win. As I've said before, if 8 starters go down, like happened in '01? Ok, THEN we talk injuries. Today? No point to these discussions.

You got issues with this team? You're nuts. We're ready to win! 19-0. You heard it here first.
Funny, I must have just imagined that posted list of OLBs you thought Thompson failed to consider from a month or so ago. I am glad you have found peace with his approach.

Good to hear you are onboard. Congratulations!

But just remember. Even great teams can fail to achieve a Super Bowl win, just ask the 2007 Patriots. Or the 1997 Packers.

[falco]

But just remember. Even great teams can fail to achieve a Super Bowl win, just ask the 2007 Patriots. Or the 1997 Packers.

I think the Patriots loss in 07 was a sign of "fundamental flaws in either coaching, gameplan, or org structure."

[Bossman641]

For the life of me I cannot determine whether RG is genuinely excited about this team's prospects or giddy at the thought that the team might fail to win a super bowl. I am leaning towards #2 though.

I don't understand how posters addressing those areas of the team they are worried about is an indication that TT failed in that area. Every single team in the league has weaknesses and trouble spots. The team that finds a way to win it all hides their weaknesses the most effectively, schemes to expose their opponents' weaknesses, and also benefits from a large amount of luck along the way.

A question for RG though. If I am wrong, and you are genuinely excited about this year's team, isn't that at least some acknowledgment that TT was right over the past few years when you were questioning his moves? I know he probably didn't adress those areas as quickly or effectively enough as you would have wished, but doesn't the overall body of work show that the needle is pointed in the right direction?

That's all I can ask from my GM.

I find it very funny that folks here are "shocked" that there are "holes" in this team. There are holes in every team. There are comparatively fewer holes here than anywhere else you can name. AROD closes most of those holes. Honestly. We ought to be able to outscore almost any team in the league in any given week, PROVIDED, the OL is at least competitive.

Let the games begin.

This I can agree with

[Bossman641]

But just remember. Even great teams can fail to achieve a Super Bowl win, just ask the 2007 Patriots. Or the 1997 Packers.

I think the Patriots loss in 07 was a sign of "fundamental flaws in either coaching, gameplan, or org structure."

Nah, that was a sign of the football gods bringing some much-needed karma to the world.

[pbmax]

My complaints rest with the rest of the GM job. I don't think he's a strong leader and I think some of his hiring decisions are questionable. His media personna is abysmal, and I really dislike him as an individual.
Really, you dislike the individual? You are smarter than this. I have never thought of you as one of those deluded folks who believe the people they see on TV or hear on the radio are really a part of their lives. Like their neighbor or best friend. That they really can tell from the public's perspective that someone is a good person, well meaning or misunderstood, or plain evil.

Why can't you just dislike the approach? You aren't necessarily wrong if the team has a good season and I believe some of your criticism has merit. Why make it personal and an either-or proposition?

[retailguy]

RG, what is your message?

TT is a failure if they don't win it all this year? Sorry, but that's very closed minded.
The message (I believe) is a disapproval of Thompson's player acquisition strategy. It has been applied (quite logically to the O line in years past) this year to find cause for concern at CB.

Essentially, RG has used several posts and unintentional sarcasm to declare that the lack of another starting/nickel CB is further indication of Thompson's lack of thoroughness, or perhaps, too much trust in his players or coaches.

Those who broach this topic and who have previously defended Thompson are being reminded of just who was right all along.

However, I think he truly finds concern about the holder to be not worthy of a post.

Umm. No. Not at all.

My message is directed SOLELY at this forum. I am saying nothing different than what was said to me for the past 3 years.

Everytime I raised a concern I was told either I was nuts, or, just wait a few years and it'd go away. Guess what? We're there.

I have no complaints with Ted and personnel selection, I've said that many times. My complaints rest with the rest of the GM job. I don't think he's a strong leader and I think some of his hiring decisions are questionable. His media personna is abysmal, and I really dislike him as an individual.

So, his team, his people, his strong suit (personnel). We should win. I believe that. And I'm not taking any excuses as to why we don't win. As I've said before, if 8 starters go down, like happened in '01? Ok, THEN we talk injuries. Today? No point to these discussions.

You got issues with this team? You're nuts. We're ready to win! 19-0. You heard it here first.
Funny, I must have just imagined that posted list of OLBs you thought Thompson failed to consider from a month or so ago. I am glad you have found peace with his approach.

Good to hear you are onboard. Congratulations!

But just remember. Even great teams can fail to achieve a Super Bowl win, just ask the 2007 Patriots. Or the 1997 Packers.

But really, doesn't that fit with my comments on his approach to free agency? What risk would we have run to bring in Thomas to see if we could generate competition at OLB? We're a little vulnerable there. Sacrificing Poppinga's or Bishop's training camp roster spot really wouldn't have changed things all that much, would it? Are you thrilled about Matthew's move to the left? If Thomas could have generated any push at all, it would have negated the need for that move.

I think I'm being incredibly consistent here. At the end of the day, it isn't the path that Ted & staff chose, so I have to accept it, right?

Today, we've got the players we have. I don't believe there will be any cut down day trades, but if there are, those are not likely to contribute in a meaningful way towards this seasons performance on the field. You can only get so many Ryan Grant's after all....

[retailguy]

My complaints rest with the rest of the GM job. I don't think he's a strong leader and I think some of his hiring decisions are questionable. His media personna is abysmal, and I really dislike him as an individual.
Really, you dislike the individual? You are smarter than this. I have never thought of you as one of those deluded folks who believe the people they see on TV or hear on the radio are really a part of their lives. Like their neighbor or best friend. That they really can tell from the public's perspective that someone is a good person, well meaning or misunderstood, or plain evil.

Why can't you just dislike the approach? You aren't necessarily wrong if the team has a good season and I believe some of your criticism has merit. Why make it personal and an either-or proposition?

Ted hides behind secrecy at unnecessary times. I do not believe that communicating fairly with the media, even on occasion, would harm this team. Yet, it goes on and on and on.

I believe it speaks to his character. That's why I said what I said. Would be happy to be wrong, but I've been watching it for 4 years now and it doesn't change. I honestly think he enjoys saying nothing. The fact he does it for no reason (or very little reason) pisses me off.

[get louder at lambeau]

RG, what is your message?

TT is a failure if they don't win it all this year? Sorry, but that's very closed minded.
The message (I believe) is a disapproval of Thompson's player acquisition strategy. It has been applied (quite logically to the O line in years past) this year to find cause for concern at CB.

Essentially, RG has used several posts and unintentional sarcasm to declare that the lack of another starting/nickel CB is further indication of Thompson's lack of thoroughness, or perhaps, too much trust in his players or coaches.

Those who broach this topic and who have previously defended Thompson are being reminded of just who was right all along.

However, I think he truly finds concern about the holder to be not worthy of a post.

Umm. No. Not at all.

My message is directed SOLELY at this forum. I am saying nothing different than what was said to me for the past 3 years.

Everytime I raised a concern I was told either I was nuts, or, just wait a few years and it'd go away. Guess what? We're there.

I have no complaints with Ted and personnel selection, I've said that many times. My complaints rest with the rest of the GM job. I don't think he's a strong leader and I think some of his hiring decisions are questionable. His media personna is abysmal, and I really dislike him as an individual.

So, his team, his people, his strong suit (personnel). We should win. I believe that. And I'm not taking any excuses as to why we don't win. As I've said before, if 8 starters go down, like happened in '01? Ok, THEN we talk injuries. Today? No point to these discussions.

You got issues with this team? You're nuts. We're ready to win! 19-0. You heard it here first.
Funny, I must have just imagined that posted list of OLBs you thought Thompson failed to consider from a month or so ago. I am glad you have found peace with his approach.

Good to hear you are onboard. Congratulations!

But just remember. Even great teams can fail to achieve a Super Bowl win, just ask the 2007 Patriots. Or the 1997 Packers.

But really, doesn't that fit with my comments on his approach to free agency? What risk would we have run to bring in Thomas to see if we could generate competition at OLB? We're a little vulnerable there. Sacrificing Poppinga's or Bishop's training camp roster spot really wouldn't have changed things all that much, would it? Are you thrilled about Matthew's move to the left? If Thomas could have generated any push at all, it would have negated the need for that move.

I think I'm being incredibly consistent here. At the end of the day, it isn't the path that Ted & staff chose, so I have to accept it, right?

Today, we've got the players we have. I don't believe there will be any cut down day trades, but if there are, those are not likely to contribute in a meaningful way towards this seasons performance on the field. You can only get so many Ryan Grant's after all....

You just said you have no complaints with Thompson on personnel, then voiced a complaint, then said "I think I'm being incredibly consistent here."

:lol:

[Brandon494]

retailguy = fail

[pbmax]

But really, doesn't that fit with my comments on his approach to free agency? What risk would we have run to bring in Thomas to see if we could generate competition at OLB? We're a little vulnerable there. Sacrificing Poppinga's or Bishop's training camp roster spot really wouldn't have changed things all that much, would it? Are you thrilled about Matthew's move to the left? If Thomas could have generated any push at all, it would have negated the need for that move.
Well, Thomas has never been the pass rushing beast he was in Baltimore. But I know what you mean.

However, given that he has received zero camp invites, he is obviously asking for starter's money. Because a camp invite means that salary becomes guaranteed the first Week of the season, and it seems no one wants that salary on the books the whole year.

So you bring in a backup at starters salary to compete with younger players and starters who resent the salary. Is the benefit worth the risk?

I think a better case can be made at one of Wolf's must have positions (QB, LT, DE/DT, CB). I would not have blinked if he spent a boatload on a free agent CB like he did with Woodson. But he must like someone in the group of Underwood/Lee/Shields. But it all comes down to the prognosis on Harris's return.

[retailguy]

But really, doesn't that fit with my comments on his approach to free agency? What risk would we have run to bring in Thomas to see if we could generate competition at OLB? We're a little vulnerable there. Sacrificing Poppinga's or Bishop's training camp roster spot really wouldn't have changed things all that much, would it? Are you thrilled about Matthew's move to the left? If Thomas could have generated any push at all, it would have negated the need for that move.
Well, Thomas has never been the pass rushing beast he was in Baltimore. But I know what you mean.

However, given that he has received zero camp invites, he is obviously asking for starter's money. Because a camp invite means that salary becomes guaranteed the first Week of the season, and it seems no one wants that salary on the books the whole year.

So you bring in a backup at starters salary to compete with younger players and starters who resent the salary. Is the benefit worth the risk?

I think a better case can be made at one of Wolf's must have positions (QB, LT, DE/DT, CB). I would not have blinked if he spent a boatload on a free agent CB like he did with Woodson. But he must like someone in the group of Underwood/Lee/Shields. But it all comes down to the prognosis on Harris's return.

I agree with both statements. What I didn't see out of Thomas' camp is that Green Bay even came sniffing around. I don't believe they'd have kept that quiet.

So, we either weren't interested, or, somehow knew he was asking for starter money.

I didn't advocate starter money at the time, and don't now. Incentives? Sure. Make it look like starter money if the guy produces, if not, cut him.

The CB thing bugs me, but I'm mostly OK with it. We have three good corners. That's better than most teams. Right now, nickel back is weak, but when you have an injury that's what happens. Dime back is especially weak, I think Harvey pointed that out earlier.

But still. You have to play what you've got. Would have been nice to bring in another starter but probably not realistic. A 3rd corner? That was realistic, and if it wasn't considered you've gotta hope they know more about Harris than they're saying.

Nonetheless, we have what we have.

[retailguy]

You just said you have no complaints with Thompson on personnel, then voiced a complaint, then said "I think I'm being incredibly consistent here."

:lol:

You're trying to make something out of nothing. I know it's difficult, but do try to keep up. ok?

[retailguy]

retailguy = fail

If you closely examine the results of your player evaluations and your prognosticating talent, this is the nicest thing you could have said to me. It virtually guarantees that my predictions will be without fail.

[RashanGary]

retailguy = fail

If you closely examine the results of your player evaluations and your prognosticating talent, this is the nicest thing you could have said to me. It virtually guarantees that my predictions will be without fail.

What is your prediction?

[Brandon494]

Ok man, your freaking out because we have concerns about our team and your trying to put it on TT for not building a perfect team. Pick out any team and I'll point out a weakness. I wanted TT to go after a CB and pass rusher this offseason as well but you ever think that the top players don't want to come to Green Bay? Your not going to build a winner thru FA in Green Bay because honestly non of the top players want to come here. Even Woodson didn't want to play for us but we were the only team to give him a big offer. Your also not going to build a winner in GB by signing a bunch of has beens like Adalius Thomas.

[denverYooper]

My complaints rest with the rest of the GM job. I don't think he's a strong leader and I think some of his hiring decisions are questionable. His media personna is abysmal, and I really dislike him as an individual.
Really, you dislike the individual? You are smarter than this. I have never thought of you as one of those deluded folks who believe the people they see on TV or hear on the radio are really a part of their lives. Like their neighbor or best friend. That they really can tell from the public's perspective that someone is a good person, well meaning or misunderstood, or plain evil.

Why can't you just dislike the approach? You aren't necessarily wrong if the team has a good season and I believe some of your criticism has merit. Why make it personal and an either-or proposition?

Ted hides behind secrecy at unnecessary times. I do not believe that communicating fairly with the media, even on occasion, would harm this team. Yet, it goes on and on and on.

I believe it speaks to his character. That's why I said what I said. Would be happy to be wrong, but I've been watching it for 4 years now and it doesn't change. I honestly think he enjoys saying nothing. The fact he does it for no reason (or very little reason) pisses me off.

Maybe Ted's just an introvert.

[get louder at lambeau]

You just said you have no complaints with Thompson on personnel, then voiced a complaint, then said "I think I'm being incredibly consistent here."

:lol:

You're trying to make something out of nothing. I know it's difficult, but do try to keep up. ok?

I'm not trying to make anything out of anything. I'm just laughing at you.

[MichiganPackerFan]

The OL has been this teams achilles heel for the past 3 seasons. It has been the driving factor to slow starts the past two years. It will be the driving factor to a slow start this year too. We go as far as the OL goes. Our biggest asset stands behind that OL. It is of the ultimate importance.

I totally buy that. Games are won and lost in the trenches. Can't wait to see what we've got!

[retailguy]

retailguy = fail

If you closely examine the results of your player evaluations and your prognosticating talent, this is the nicest thing you could have said to me. It virtually guarantees that my predictions will be without fail.

What is your prediction?

Well, there have been a number in this thread, but lets stick with 2 for now, ok?

19-0

This team goes as far as the OL takes them.

[retailguy]

You just said you have no complaints with Thompson on personnel, then voiced a complaint, then said "I think I'm being incredibly consistent here."

:lol:

You're trying to make something out of nothing. I know it's difficult, but do try to keep up. ok?

I'm not trying to make anything out of anything. I'm just laughing at you.

Wow, I thought you were more on the ball than that. More than a few are now laughing at you.

[retailguy]

My complaints rest with the rest of the GM job. I don't think he's a strong leader and I think some of his hiring decisions are questionable. His media personna is abysmal, and I really dislike him as an individual.
Really, you dislike the individual? You are smarter than this. I have never thought of you as one of those deluded folks who believe the people they see on TV or hear on the radio are really a part of their lives. Like their neighbor or best friend. That they really can tell from the public's perspective that someone is a good person, well meaning or misunderstood, or plain evil.

Why can't you just dislike the approach? You aren't necessarily wrong if the team has a good season and I believe some of your criticism has merit. Why make it personal and an either-or proposition?

Ted hides behind secrecy at unnecessary times. I do not believe that communicating fairly with the media, even on occasion, would harm this team. Yet, it goes on and on and on.

I believe it speaks to his character. That's why I said what I said. Would be happy to be wrong, but I've been watching it for 4 years now and it doesn't change. I honestly think he enjoys saying nothing. The fact he does it for no reason (or very little reason) pisses me off.

Maybe Ted's just an introvert.

Either that, or an asshole. :P

[retailguy]

Ok man, your freaking out because we have concerns about our team and your trying to put it on TT for not building a perfect team. Pick out any team and I'll point out a weakness. I wanted TT to go after a CB and pass rusher this offseason as well but you ever think that the top players don't want to come to Green Bay? Your not going to build a winner thru FA in Green Bay because honestly non of the top players want to come here. Even Woodson didn't want to play for us but we were the only team to give him a big offer. Your also not going to build a winner in GB by signing a bunch of has beens like Adalius Thomas.

You seem to be having difficulty comprehending simple conversation. This is almost directly backwards to what I'm saying. I would suggest that you translate this thread using babelfish, into whatever language you spoke in your remarks above.

In simple english - follow closely - THIS TEAM AS IT IS, IS GOOD ENOUGH TO WIN THE SUPER BOWL. TODAY, I SEE ZERO REASONS WHY THIS TEAM SHOULD NOT BE COMPETITIVE AND BE IN A POSITION TO WIN EVERY SINGLE GAME THIS YEAR. EVERY NFL TEAM HAS HOLES, BUT OURS ARE SMALLER THAN MOST OTHER TEAMS.

[RashanGary]

Well, there have been a number in this thread, but lets stick with 2 for now, ok?

19-0

This team goes as far as the OL takes them.

How is the OL going to do? No matter what happens, you can sit and claim the OL took them there. How is the OL going to play? What does that mean for the record? If they win 11 games does that mean they had a good OL? If they win the SB does that mean they had a great OL.

Sounds to me like you have a couple of unmeasurable predictions that you're wearing as a mask to hide how weak your stance is and also to undermine the job that has been done here the last 5 years.

Like Partial before you, you can sit here and act like you have a strong opinion, but 90% of the people here just aren't buying it. You're only convincing yourself.


As for the rest of us, we're excited about a big year where we're one of the top SB contenders heading into the season. I, for one, think the hype is legit. The Packers are a good to great team and only on the rise.

[retailguy]

Well, there have been a number in this thread, but lets stick with 2 for now, ok?

19-0

This team goes as far as the OL takes them.

How is the OL going to do? No matter what happens, you can sit and claim the OL took them there. How is the OL going to play? What does that mean for the record? If they win 11 games does that mean they had a good OL? If they win the SB does that mean they had a great OL.

Sounds to me like you have a couple of unmeasurable predictions that you're wearing as a mask to hide how weak your stance is and also to undermine the job that has been done here the last 5 years.

Like Partial before you, you can sit here and act like you have a strong opinion, but 90% of the people here just aren't buying it. You're only convincing yourself.


As for the rest of us, we're excited about a big year where we're one of the top SB contenders heading into the season. I, for one, think the hype is legit. The Packers are a good to great team and only on the rise.

If Rodgers winds up on his back 50 times again this season, you really aren't going to claim (again) that it's Rodgers fault for "holding the ball" again, are you?

We will have a "great" OL if they are in the top 25% of the league in sacks allowed and hurries.

Honestly, I just want them to provide adequate protection. That ought to be pretty clear even to your 29 year old eyes.

Last time I checked, 19-0 was fairly measurable. Much more measurable than your statement above about being "pointed in the right direction" anyhow. You're the king of "generic" predictions Justin, so you ought to know.

Which direction would that be? I expect Super Bowls. 10 wins or 11 wins every year followed by a quick playoff exit isn't going to cut it. Not in Green Bay.

Bobblehead had a great one. Anything less than the NFCC game would be a disappointment. that's a good one.

Today, I think if they lose that game, it's a disappointment.

90%? You had a poll without me? Yeah, OK. Love your "source" on that one. :lol:

[get louder at lambeau]

You just said you have no complaints with Thompson on personnel, then voiced a complaint, then said "I think I'm being incredibly consistent here."

:lol:

You're trying to make something out of nothing. I know it's difficult, but do try to keep up. ok?

I'm not trying to make anything out of anything. I'm just laughing at you.

Wow, I thought you were more on the ball than that. More than a few are now laughing at you.

You, your mom, who else?

[RashanGary]

RG, you know damn well no team in the NFL is going to go 19-0. You're setting up some big expectation so that anything less than SB is a tremendous failure.


Sheesh. The Packers are finally an elite contender and all we can do is sit around here and bitch. I thought that was going to go away when they started winning. Now they're winning and you're still bitching.

Sherman go canned because the cap, age and general trend of the team was showing signs of great concern. His records were fine while he was here. It was what he was giving up long term each year that everyone saw catching up to him. That's why he was fired.

Unlike Sherman, Thompson's 11-5 playoff exit is with a crapload of cap space to keep building and on the shoulders of the youngest team and the best young QB in the league that he drafted.

You're just confused. Thompson does have time. You just can't see why. That's a you thing, Everyone else gets it.

[retailguy]

RG, you know damn well no team in the NFL is going to go 19-0. You're setting up some big expectation so that anything less than SB is a tremendous failure.


Sheesh. The Packers are finally an elite contender and all we can do is sit around here and bitch. I thought that was going to go away when they started winning. Now they're winning and you're still bitching.

Sherman go canned because the cap, age and general trend of the team was showing signs of great concern. His records were fine while he was here. It was what he was giving up long term each year that everyone saw catching up to him. That's why he was fired.

Unlike Sherman, Thompson's 11-5 playoff exit is with a crapload of cap space to keep building and on the shoulders of the youngest team and the best young QB in the league that he drafted.

You're just confused. Thompson does have time. You just can't see why. That's a you thing, Everyone else gets it.

Two years ago, I'd have believed you. What does that Pats team that went 18-1 have that we don't have? where are they better? Seriously?

What's wrong with 19-0? So we go 14-2 secure 1st round bye, go into Super Bowl and win. That'd probably be ok. :)

Stop trying to tamp back the expectations. You've got 17 weeks to watch good football.

Honest question Justin. Let's say the bottom falls out of this season for inexplicable reasons, and just like 2008 they finish 6-10. How will you feel and what will that do to your arrow that's "pointing up"?

Please note, I don't think that's happening, but you seem fearful of what's happening this season. I just am trying to understand your ping pong ball thought process. Your talk today doesn't match your talk the past two years. what's changed Justin?

[retailguy]

You just said you have no complaints with Thompson on personnel, then voiced a complaint, then said "I think I'm being incredibly consistent here."

:lol:

You're trying to make something out of nothing. I know it's difficult, but do try to keep up. ok?

I'm not trying to make anything out of anything. I'm just laughing at you.

Wow, I thought you were more on the ball than that. More than a few are now laughing at you.

You, your mom, who else?

OOOO. Good one! I stopped talking/thinking this way when I left grade school. But, maybe it is past your bedtime? Really, this is getting old. I didn't know you were so intellectually challenged. It is really quite sad when you think about it.

[Bossman641]

Since when does pointed in the right direction mean 19-0?

I don't disagree that you have sometimes took unnecessary grief around here, but who shit in your oatmeal this morning?

[RashanGary]

RG against the world, haha.

[get louder at lambeau]

You just said you have no complaints with Thompson on personnel, then voiced a complaint, then said "I think I'm being incredibly consistent here."

:lol:

You're trying to make something out of nothing. I know it's difficult, but do try to keep up. ok?

I'm not trying to make anything out of anything. I'm just laughing at you.

Wow, I thought you were more on the ball than that. More than a few are now laughing at you.

You, your mom, who else?

OOOO. Good one! I stopped talking/thinking this way when I left grade school. But, maybe it is past your bedtime? Really, this is getting old. I didn't know you were so intellectually challenged. It is really quite sad when you think about it.

Sorry, retail, but you're the idiot in this thread. It's clear to everyone who has posted here but you. I'm just having fun watching them kick the village idiot around. Good luck with your thinly-veiled wishes for Packer failure. Then you'll show em that you were right all along! :lol:

[retailguy]

Since when does pointed in the right direction mean 19-0?

I don't disagree that you have sometimes took unnecessary grief around here, but who shit in your oatmeal this morning?

Honestly, he's trying to "nail my predictions down". then he follows it up with "pointing in the right direction". WTF?

So what are the expectations this year? Seriously. I am reading early in this thread some ridiculous fears. No basis in reality. No basis in fact. We should be excited about this season. The team is ready.

No one shit in my oatmeal. It's been juvenile attack after juvenile attack today.

I've listened to this shit on the other side of the fence for 4 years now, and today, now I hear things that sound like "lets not get the expectations too high". really?

This team is ready. No one has come up with one good reason why this isn't the year and we shouldn't look at it as such.

[sharpe1027]

In simple english - follow closely - THIS TEAM AS IT IS, IS GOOD ENOUGH TO WIN THE SUPER BOWL. TODAY, I SEE ZERO REASONS WHY THIS TEAM SHOULD NOT BE COMPETITIVE AND BE IN A POSITION TO WIN EVERY SINGLE GAME THIS YEAR. EVERY NFL TEAM HAS HOLES, BUT OURS ARE SMALLER THAN MOST OTHER TEAMS.

I'll take the bait.

So if we don't go 19-0 it then you necessarily must blame it entirely upon the coaching staff. An interesting position. I don't agree, but it is at least a little interesting.

[sharpe1027]

No one has come up with one good reason why this isn't the year and we shouldn't look at it as such.

Every year is the year, right up until they are eliminated from the playoffs.

[Bossman641]

Here you go RG, I'll go on record. Assuming there is not a serious rash of injuries or a multi-game injury to Rodgers or Woodson, I will be disappointed with anything less than 11-5 and at least one playoff win. I was gonna say anything less than a trip to the NFCCG but decided to go with a playoff win instead. My reason being that I see this team similar to the mid 90's Packers teams in that I will give them a few years to progress from playoff experience to a playoff win to a SB trip.

[RashanGary]

If the Packers stink, my opinion changes. Up until now and going forward it all seems to be pointing up and staying up for some time.

[Joemailman]

retailguy = fail

If you closely examine the results of your player evaluations and your prognosticating talent, this is the nicest thing you could have said to me. It virtually guarantees that my predictions will be without fail.

What is your prediction?

Well, there have been a number in this thread, but lets stick with 2 for now, ok?

19-0

This team goes as far as the OL takes them.

No, this team goes as far as the defense takes them. Despite all the sacks last year, the Packers still had one of the top offenses in the league. They failed to make it to the Super Bowl because they couldn't stop the good passing offenses. No matter how well the offensive line protects Rodgers, they won't make it to the Super Bowl unless the pass defense improves.

[retailguy]

Here you go RG, I'll go on record. Assuming there is not a serious rash of injuries or a multi-game injury to Rodgers or Woodson, I will be disappointed with anything less than 11-5 and at least one playoff win. I was gonna say anything less than a trip to the NFCCG but decided to go with a playoff win instead. My reason being that I see this team similar to the mid 90's Packers teams in that I will give them a few years to progress from playoff experience to a playoff win to a SB trip.

that's a good prediction. hope we do better than that.

[retailguy]

If the Packers stink, my opinion changes. Up until now and going forward it all seems to be pointing up and staying up for some time.

Then, in the meantime, lets quit trying to moderate the expectations.

Enjoy the ride Justin. It's gonna be fun.

[Bossman641]

Here you go RG, I'll go on record. Assuming there is not a serious rash of injuries or a multi-game injury to Rodgers or Woodson, I will be disappointed with anything less than 11-5 and at least one playoff win. I was gonna say anything less than a trip to the NFCCG but decided to go with a playoff win instead. My reason being that I see this team similar to the mid 90's Packers teams in that I will give them a few years to progress from playoff experience to a playoff win to a SB trip.

that's a good prediction. hope we do better than that.

I too hope we do better, but if it needs to be broken down into satisfied/disappointed then that's where I will draw the line.

[RashanGary]

Back in 2005 and 2006 when nobody saw this coming, we were predicting the Packers were making the types of decisions that would pay off in the long term.

The long term is here. While you doomed and gloomed, we thought this was coming. Now it's here. We have several years to be SB competitive.


No need to make any bold predictions. They already came true.

[RashanGary]

Retail, everyone sees through the charade.

Enjoy the season too.

[Tarlam!]

Retail, everyone sees through the charade.

Nope, not this puppy. I think the animosity by some posters shown towards RG on this thread have clouded it for me so much that I can't see or follow the thinking.

I don't get RG's message, by the same token, I don't get you calling him out, Nick.

[retailguy]

Retail, everyone sees through the charade.

Enjoy the season too.

This is hilarious Justin. You keep claiming alterior motives. Not sure how I'd pull those off. Not less than a month ago, I said that I believed that my good buddy Ted would not be fired if the Packers had a bad season. I think I even used 6-10 as in our 2008 season, which I referred to above.

Here is exactly what I did yesterday. Listen closely. I fed back to you and a few others, almost exactly the words you have used to describe the team over the last 4 years. I talked about the same outcomes, the excitement about the players and the success it translated to on the field. I talked about a "stacked" team with few holes, and how there wasn't any reason the team would be competitive.

I "enhanced" it a bit with the 19-0 talk, but realistically, if you look at the schedule, there isn't a game they shouldn't be competitive in, and there isn't a game that on paper they cannot win.

Justin - I was upfront in this thread that I still don't like Ted, but this is his team now, and it should win. THIS YEAR. Truthfully, I expect them to win, and I believe that they can win all their games and they will go to the Super Bowl. That was not hype. I kept saying that, but you still don't believe me. The vicious attacks were really priceless. Not ONE legitimate reason why the team can't succeed, just repeated statements that "my expectations were too high". Yeah.

It was very entertaining for me to "feed back" the exact thoughts and in some cases the exact words you guys used over the last 4 years. I was told I was essentially "over exhuberant", which hysterically is what a lot of us told YOU over the past 3 years. Watching you curb your excitement and lower the expectations was priceless. When you talked about a championship within the next 5 years, I almost lost it.

In the end, Justin, I expect the team to be very very good this year. I will be very very disappointed if they are not. I certainly will not claim credit for anything, and barring 2-14 with no injuries will probably not be calling for Ted's head, since it is largely pointless at this juncture.

Your conspiracy theory kills me. I'm sincerely laughing out loud.

[mraynrand]

That was a pretty shameful display, Retail. You are admitting that you were playing a game. You were also dishonest: You wrote: "The vicious attacks were really priceless. Not ONE legitimate reason why the team can't succeed, just repeated statements that "my expectations were too high". Well, I and various people pointed out legitimate reasons why the team might not succeed. Most, responding to the original intent of the thread, addressed the concerns in a thoughtful, legitimate manner. I'm very sorry to say that you poisoned the process by playing a dishonest 'gotcha' game (actually, thinking about it, it's not so much dishonest as it is like a troll technique - pushing buttons in a way that you know you're likely to get a knee-jerk emotional response). You could have just stated your opinion about the team, Thompson, etc. without the (accurately described by JH) charade. Your disagreement with those who like the Thompson strategy would have been welcome (or not) but it would have been far better if presented honestly and openly. I was sorry to see you choose the route you did.

BTW, This is how I would critique Thompson writing from the anti--Thompson perspective: "Many have supported the Thompson strategy of concentrating on the draft and coaching up internally, rather than signing free agents. Based on some of the gaps in the roster - defensive back, possibly pass rush, depth at LB and OT - it seems to me that Thompson needed to jump into free agency to address at least one of these areas. If the team suffers for it (dropping out of the playoffs early), it will be a significant repudiation of the Thompson strategy - at the very least so far as making a Superbowl run is concerned."

[ThunderDan]

I worry every year about the pass rush except when we had Dave Roller.

[pbmax]

C'mon RG. I know you take abuse occasionally for being contrarian on Thompson and the OL. But if you go out of your way to call people foolish and cowardly, is it going to help?

State your piece and stick by your guns. Your posts are good enough to not need the agitation.

And that's enough Stuart Smiley for today.

[cheesner]

Retail, everyone sees through the charade.

Nope, not this puppy. I think the animosity by some posters shown towards RG on this thread have clouded it for me so much that I can't see or follow the thinking.

I don't get RG's message, by the same token, I don't get you calling him out, Nick.
I don't think that some posters understand what RG is trying to say. Being a long-time extreme TT critic; stating that the Packers are now very talented; and still making sarcastic cracks ridiculing TT's capabilities are contradictions.

If you ask me RG is on some level disappointed and frustrated that the Packers are looking so good and he was wrong about TT and his team-building strategy.

[sharpe1027]

I worry every year about the pass rush except when we had Dave Roller.

Bring back Tim Harris.

[retailguy]

That was a pretty shameful display, Retail. You are admitting that you were playing a game. You were also dishonest: You wrote: "The vicious attacks were really priceless. Not ONE legitimate reason why the team can't succeed, just repeated statements that "my expectations were too high". Well, I and various people pointed out legitimate reasons why the team might not succeed. Most, responding to the original intent of the thread, addressed the concerns in a thoughtful, legitimate manner. I'm very sorry to say that you poisoned the process by playing a dishonest 'gotcha' game (actually, thinking about it, it's not so much dishonest as it is like a troll technique - pushing buttons in a way that you know you're likely to get a knee-jerk emotional response). You could have just stated your opinion about the team, Thompson, etc. without the (accurately described by JH) charade. Your disagreement with those who like the Thompson strategy would have been welcome (or not) but it would have been far better if presented honestly and openly. I was sorry to see you choose the route you did.

BTW, This is how I would critique Thompson writing from the anti--Thompson perspective: "Many have supported the Thompson strategy of concentrating on the draft and coaching up internally, rather than signing free agents. Based on some of the gaps in the roster - defensive back, possibly pass rush, depth at LB and OT - it seems to me that Thompson needed to jump into free agency to address at least one of these areas. If the team suffers for it (dropping out of the playoffs early), it will be a significant repudiation of the Thompson strategy - at the very least so far as making a Superbowl run is concerned."

Gee thanks Dad. :D

Let's be real straightforward. I don't believe that there are legitimate reasons for this team not to succeed. We have one starting position in a bit of flux for the first several weeks of the season. Harris will be back. Is he over the hill? Hope not. But I don't know. You have to believe that McCarthy & Thompson DO know or they would have done something. It makes the dime weak. Nickel too, but again, when a starter is out, you expect that. It is certainly something you expect them to play through and to compensate for with safety help.

Pass rush? Is it a concern? I don't think they believe it to be. I hope the defense has been largely vanilla. If it isn't, defensively the team will take a step back. But realistically, they can afford a step back and still be competitive and successful. A secondary concern compared to the holes of the past 3 seasons.

As to your second paragraph, I agree with it, however, it isn't realistic, AND more importantly it's been said many times. It isn't appropriate for this season, maybe next, but likely two years out before you can say that with any validity. I could have chose to shoot it down with the same rhetoric we've all heard before but I'll spare you the agony, since you might ground me. :wink:

The only intangible that really remains, is, does Ted alter his approach if they make a run and it doesn't work (ie - loss in the NFCC or the divisional round), and they "tool up" next year and make another run. Does that "tool up" happen with young guys, or older established veterans via free agency?

I think Ted believes he can get over the hump with almost all drafted players. I don't know if he can, but IF he can, this seems to be the year to do it.

When the biggest complaints are the pass rush, and the 3rd cornerback, and the fear of injury? Hell rand, this team is stacked. With Ted's players.

What I said about my predictions of the season stands. It wasn't and isn't a game. What I said about Ted stands, it wasn't or isn't a game. The method of delivery? Sure. I mimicked several personalities and conveyed EXACTLY what they said in response to your point #2 over the last 3 years. And we got the same responses that we gave them over the last 3 years...

[retailguy]

Retail, everyone sees through the charade.

Nope, not this puppy. I think the animosity by some posters shown towards RG on this thread have clouded it for me so much that I can't see or follow the thinking.

I don't get RG's message, by the same token, I don't get you calling him out, Nick.
I don't think that some posters understand what RG is trying to say. Being a long-time extreme TT critic; stating that the Packers are now very talented; and still making sarcastic cracks ridiculing TT's capabilities are contradictions.

If you ask me RG is on some level disappointed and frustrated that the Packers are looking so good and he was wrong about TT and his team-building strategy.

Nope. Not at all. I didn't agree with the methods, this development was very painful for me to watch. That being said, I expect the team to do well this year, and do not believe the minor holes it has will affect it much.

[RashanGary]

The Packers are SB competitors. It's your imagination that I backpedaled. I knew you were setting up expectations higher than any team could live up to.

When I swooped in to say those expectations are high, you accuse me of backpedaling.

I knew you were playing a game. Now I know the name of it.



People might not know, for sure, what you're doing, but there are a lot of people who aren't taking what you're saying seriously because we can tell you have some strange motive. In this case, it was the gotchya game. You think you can just post, "you look silly" and it's so. People here are smarter than that, RG. Your tactics have lost their effectiveness because people don't trust you. I don't anyway.

That's not a personal attack. That's how I respond to you, with caution and mistrust.

[retailguy]

The Packers are SB competitors. It's your imagination that I backpedaled. I knew you were setting up expectations higher than any team could live up to.

When I swooped in to say those expectations are high, you accuse me of backpedaling.

I knew you were playing a game. Now I know the name of it.



People might not know, for sure, what you're doing, but there are a lot of people who aren't taking what you're saying seriously because we can tell you have some strange motive. In this case, it was the gotchya game. You think you can just post, "you look silly" and it's so. People here are smarter than that, RG. Your tactics have lost their effectiveness because people don't trust you. I don't anyway.

That's not a personal attack. That's how I respond to you, with caution and mistrust.

Justin, I just told you what I did. Plain, clear and to the point. You can describe me any way you'd like. I'm not doing "anything", this is a sports forum. I picked on you and a couple of others a little bit, but really, that's all I did.

I also stated my optimism for the coming season. There are no other motives for at least the 6th time.

It doesn't matter to me whether or not anyone sees "what I'm doing". I don't understand why you take this so seriously, it is really kind of funny. For a long long time, things happen here by "majority". minority views are ridiculed. All I did was ridicule the majority view a bit. That's it.

[Tarlam!]

Geez, in the interest of the members, let's bury the threadjack and go back to the original topic. 3 pages of this crap is enough, don't we think?

[RashanGary]

Whatever. It's a good year coming up. We have a great chance at a SB. A few things have to bounce our way, but I like our chances. I like our strengths and hope for some health in our weaker areas or even a trade or two at deadlines could help.

[RashanGary]

Geez, in the interest of the members, let's bury the threadjack and go back to the original topic. 3 pages of this crap is enough, don't we think?

You are an excellent rescuer!

[get louder at lambeau]

So to paraphrase retail-

"It now looks like I was wrong in believing that Ted Thompson didn't know what he was doing, but I don't feel like just admitting it, so I thought I'd make a cute little game of it by saying that we're going undefeated! I'm so clever, and you guys are so stupid! LOLOL!!"

[mraynrand]

That was a pretty shameful display, Retail. You are admitting that you were playing a game. You were also dishonest: You wrote: "The vicious attacks were really priceless. Not ONE legitimate reason why the team can't succeed, just repeated statements that "my expectations were too high". Well, I and various people pointed out legitimate reasons why the team might not succeed. Most, responding to the original intent of the thread, addressed the concerns in a thoughtful, legitimate manner. I'm very sorry to say that you poisoned the process by playing a dishonest 'gotcha' game (actually, thinking about it, it's not so much dishonest as it is like a troll technique - pushing buttons in a way that you know you're likely to get a knee-jerk emotional response). You could have just stated your opinion about the team, Thompson, etc. without the (accurately described by JH) charade. Your disagreement with those who like the Thompson strategy would have been welcome (or not) but it would have been far better if presented honestly and openly. I was sorry to see you choose the route you did.

BTW, This is how I would critique Thompson writing from the anti--Thompson perspective: "Many have supported the Thompson strategy of concentrating on the draft and coaching up internally, rather than signing free agents. Based on some of the gaps in the roster - defensive back, possibly pass rush, depth at LB and OT - it seems to me that Thompson needed to jump into free agency to address at least one of these areas. If the team suffers for it (dropping out of the playoffs early), it will be a significant repudiation of the Thompson strategy - at the very least so far as making a Superbowl run is concerned."

Gee thanks Dad. :D

Let's be real straightforward. I don't believe that there are legitimate reasons for this team not to succeed. We have one starting position in a bit of flux for the first several weeks of the season. Harris will be back. Is he over the hill? Hope not. But I don't know. You have to believe that McCarthy & Thompson DO know or they would have done something. It makes the dime weak. Nickel too, but again, when a starter is out, you expect that. It is certainly something you expect them to play through and to compensate for with safety help.

Pass rush? Is it a concern? I don't think they believe it to be. I hope the defense has been largely vanilla. If it isn't, defensively the team will take a step back. But realistically, they can afford a step back and still be competitive and successful. A secondary concern compared to the holes of the past 3 seasons.

As to your second paragraph, I agree with it, however, it isn't realistic, AND more importantly it's been said many times. It isn't appropriate for this season, maybe next, but likely two years out before you can say that with any validity. I could have chose to shoot it down with the same rhetoric we've all heard before but I'll spare you the agony, since you might ground me. :wink:

The only intangible that really remains, is, does Ted alter his approach if they make a run and it doesn't work (ie - loss in the NFCC or the divisional round), and they "tool up" next year and make another run. Does that "tool up" happen with young guys, or older established veterans via free agency?

I think Ted believes he can get over the hump with almost all drafted players. I don't know if he can, but IF he can, this seems to be the year to do it.

When the biggest complaints are the pass rush, and the 3rd cornerback, and the fear of injury? Hell rand, this team is stacked. With Ted's players.

What I said about my predictions of the season stands. It wasn't and isn't a game. What I said about Ted stands, it wasn't or isn't a game. The method of delivery? Sure. I mimicked several personalities and conveyed EXACTLY what they said in response to your point #2 over the last 3 years. And we got the same responses that we gave them over the last 3 years...

You're welcome. This was a much more reasoned response. I'll lift your grounding.

Seriously though, what do you mean by: "As to your second paragraph, I agree with it, however, it isn't realistic, AND more importantly it's been said many times. It isn't appropriate for this season"

If the Packers drop out early from the playoffs due to personnel problems at one or more of the following: DB, OL and pass rushing OLB/DE, why would this not be a repudiation of Thompson's ability to to use FA to make a Superbowl run. We know he can build a talented roster through the draft - he's done it twice in two different cities. What we don't know is whether he can seal the deal using FA/trade when necessary (or whether he can get by without making repeated dips into the FA/pro player pool). Dropping out of the playoffs early again this year would be an another argument against his strategy, would it not? Or are you saying it has to happen three or four years in a row to establish a pattern?

[retailguy]

If the Packers drop out early from the playoffs due to personnel problems at one or more of the following: DB, OL and pass rushing OLB/DE, why would this not be a repudiation of Thompson's ability to to use FA to make a Superbowl run. We know he can build a talented roster through the draft - he's done it twice in two different cities. What we don't know is whether he can seal the deal using FA/trade when necessary (or whether he can get by without making repeated dips into the FA/pro player pool). Dropping out of the playoffs early again this year would be an another argument against his strategy, would it not? Or are you saying it has to happen three or four years in a row to establish a pattern?

From my vantage point it probably would be a repudiation. (But that won't count for very much) The issue becomes we don't have a pattern, so we'll hear lots of other reasons. A few valid, but most conjecture based on their personal opinions of Ted.

Honestly, even Sherman got a few years of getting "close" before folks started to get frustrated with the FA approach he had to plugging holes. Criticism got strong after 2003, with it reaching a crazed fever pitch in 2004.

I don't believe we were in position for a run until this year. Last years "holes" had to do with starting positions. Last year we had more issues with regard to backup depth, and the rookies were expected to contribute, and a few actually did, with Matthew's surpassing all expectations. Even I think Ted gets more than one stacked year to "make it". Though I can't come up with a legitimate reason as to why he'd need another year. It should happen this year.

I don't believe that there is any hope that your point will be accepted after this season, even if they're "one and done" in the playoffs again. I don't even think you'll get most to buy into it with an 8-8 season or below. After all, you read it for yourself "the meter is pointing in the right direction". Impossible to quantify, and again based on their personal opinions of Ted.

Thanks for taking me off of grounding. :wink: I'll try to be good. Honest.

[Scott Campbell]

I worry every year about the pass rush except when we had Dave Roller.


:lol:

[ThunderDan]

I guess after we lost to TB last year not 1 of the supposed "ProPacker" supporter didn't call for TT and MM heads. I mean let's be honest here. There has been times of TT bashing on this board. Of course when you finish a season 7-1 it tends to make it harder to critize the product on the field.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Short of a rash of injuries which can derail any good team at any time, I will satisfied with a playoff win and happy with a NFCCG appearance. I think that winning 3 of 4 in the MINx2, DAL & NE games will be a good sign of things to come in the playoffs.

[Tarlam!]

I guess after we lost to TB last year not 1 of the supposed "ProPacker" supporter didn't call for TT and MM heads. I mean let's be honest here. There has been times of TT bashing on this board. Of course when you finish a season 7-1 it tends to make it harder to critize the product on the field.


I consider myself ProPacker and I didn't call for anyone's head. I was too devastated.

[Scott Campbell]

Ted hides behind secrecy at unnecessary times. I do not believe that communicating fairly with the media, even on occasion, would harm this team. Yet, it goes on and on and on.

I believe it speaks to his character. That's why I said what I said. Would be happy to be wrong, but I've been watching it for 4 years now and it doesn't change. I honestly think he enjoys saying nothing. The fact he does it for no reason (or very little reason) pisses me off.


For an otherwise rational guy, this is kinda crazy. He's in introvert. That's not a character flaw. I don't understand how you can watch a few clips of the guy and project Voldemort levels of evil onto the poor guy. Ted's making you kinda nutty. Just look at this thread.

[Tony Oday]

I guess after we lost to TB last year not 1 of the supposed "ProPacker" supporter didn't call for TT and MM heads. I mean let's be honest here. There has been times of TT bashing on this board. Of course when you finish a season 7-1 it tends to make it harder to critize the product on the field.


I consider myself ProPacker and I didn't call for anyone's head. I was too devastated.

I dont think I did.

[Scott Campbell]

I sure did. Damn I was pissed. :lol:

[retailguy]

Ted hides behind secrecy at unnecessary times. I do not believe that communicating fairly with the media, even on occasion, would harm this team. Yet, it goes on and on and on.

I believe it speaks to his character. That's why I said what I said. Would be happy to be wrong, but I've been watching it for 4 years now and it doesn't change. I honestly think he enjoys saying nothing. The fact he does it for no reason (or very little reason) pisses me off.


For an otherwise rational guy, this is kinda crazy. He's in introvert. That's not a character flaw. I don't understand how you can watch a few clips of the guy and project Voldemort levels of evil onto the poor guy. Ted's making you kinda nutty. Just look at this thread.

An Introvert? :lol:

So, introverts purposely lie and mislead? :P

Yes, he's an introvert. Yes, his media personna will never be great. Plenty of introverts do just fine with the media and don't find it necessary to lie or mislead. They certainly don't smirk at them after they lie and mislead.

:lol: You're killing me Scott.

[retailguy]

I guess after we lost to TB last year not 1 of the supposed "ProPacker" supporter didn't call for TT and MM heads. I mean let's be honest here. There has been times of TT bashing on this board. Of course when you finish a season 7-1 it tends to make it harder to critize the product on the field.

I'm sure that somehow this is directed at me. I certainly don't remember calling for his head over this, but hey someone could prove me wrong I suppose.

Ending a season 7-1 does silence some folks. For others it raises the question of why can't this team start a season strong? That's a few year "trend" here in GB, and I don't think that anyone can put a finger on it as to "why".

At least I can't. And for clarity sake, the reasons for that probably do not rest with Ted. They rest with either the coach and coaches he hired or the players he chose to employ or both. Or neither, it could just be the fear of refrigerators falling from the sky aimed at Finley. :wink:

[cheesner]

Ted hides behind secrecy at unnecessary times. I do not believe that communicating fairly with the media, even on occasion, would harm this team. Yet, it goes on and on and on.

I believe it speaks to his character. That's why I said what I said. Would be happy to be wrong, but I've been watching it for 4 years now and it doesn't change. I honestly think he enjoys saying nothing. The fact he does it for no reason (or very little reason) pisses me off.


For an otherwise rational guy, this is kinda crazy. He's in introvert. That's not a character flaw. I don't understand how you can watch a few clips of the guy and project Voldemort levels of evil onto the poor guy. Ted's making you kinda nutty. Just look at this thread.

An Introvert? :lol:

So, introverts purposely lie and mislead? :P

Yes, he's an introvert. Yes, his media personna will never be great. Plenty of introverts do just fine with the media and don't find it necessary to lie or mislead. They certainly don't smirk at them after they lie and mislead.

:lol: You're killing me Scott.

Lie and mislead? Okay, I will bite. Please provide one example of a Lie from Ted Thompson. Mislead? Maybe, but then it is important to the job to hide your intentions in many issues from the other GMs in the NFL. (and no it won't work for TT to just email his intentions to just the Packer fans)

[RashanGary]

Ted is very obvious. He keeps saying the same things over and over again with a smirk. Everyone knows he's giving generic answers. That's very different from actually lying or actually misleading. He's basically just not saying anything.

[ThunderDan]

I guess after we lost to TB last year not 1 of the supposed "ProPacker" supporter didn't call for TT and MM heads. I mean let's be honest here. There has been times of TT bashing on this board. Of course when you finish a season 7-1 it tends to make it harder to critize the product on the field.

I'm sure that somehow this is directed at me. I certainly don't remember calling for his head over this, but hey someone could prove me wrong I suppose.

Ending a season 7-1 does silence some folks. For others it raises the question of why can't this team start a season strong? That's a few year "trend" here in GB, and I don't think that anyone can put a finger on it as to "why".

At least I can't. And for clarity sake, the reasons for that probably do not rest with Ted. They rest with either the coach and coaches he hired or the players he chose to employ or both. Or neither, it could just be the fear of refrigerators falling from the sky aimed at Finley. :wink:

It wasn't aimed at you. It wasn't aimed at anyone. It was a statement on how the people feel toward the management of a team based on what is happening at the moment.

[ThunderDan]

I guess after we lost to TB last year not 1 of the supposed "ProPacker" supporter didn't call for TT and MM heads. I mean let's be honest here. There has been times of TT bashing on this board. Of course when you finish a season 7-1 it tends to make it harder to critize the product on the field.


I consider myself ProPacker and I didn't call for anyone's head. I was too devastated. :lol:

I was on vacation in California and didn't get to see the game. I am so happy I missed it. I boarded the plane and the Packers were ahead or close at halftime and didn't hear anything about the game until after we landed.

[Tarlam!]

Ending a season 7-1 does silence some folks. For others it raises the question of why can't this team start a season strong? That's a few year "trend" here in GB, and I don't think that anyone can put a finger on it as to "why".


This is actually worth a threath of its own; I am no expert, only been into the game for 9 or so years. But in that time, I've seen 6-0 teams miss the playoffs. I think, and I've read, that latter 8 games is far more important to a ball club than the previous. I aint gonna dig up stats, but I truly believe, a strong finish is more valuable thatn a fast start.

[Bossman641]

Ted hides behind secrecy at unnecessary times. I do not believe that communicating fairly with the media, even on occasion, would harm this team. Yet, it goes on and on and on.

I believe it speaks to his character. That's why I said what I said. Would be happy to be wrong, but I've been watching it for 4 years now and it doesn't change. I honestly think he enjoys saying nothing. The fact he does it for no reason (or very little reason) pisses me off.


For an otherwise rational guy, this is kinda crazy. He's in introvert. That's not a character flaw. I don't understand how you can watch a few clips of the guy and project Voldemort levels of evil onto the poor guy. Ted's making you kinda nutty. Just look at this thread.

An Introvert? :lol:

So, introverts purposely lie and mislead? :P

Yes, he's an introvert. Yes, his media personna will never be great. Plenty of introverts do just fine with the media and don't find it necessary to lie or mislead. They certainly don't smirk at them after they lie and mislead.

:lol: You're killing me Scott.

Lie and mislead? Okay, I will bite. Please provide one example of a Lie from Ted Thompson. Mislead? Maybe, but then it is important to the job to hide your intentions in many issues from the other GMs in the NFL. (and no it won't work for TT to just email his intentions to just the Packer fans)

Seconded. I would like to see an example of TT lying to the media. Does he give them nothing? Yes. Does he speak in generalities and say nothing? Yes.

I'd say he is consistent.

[Tarlam!]

I'm getting really exhausted by this witch hunt...

[Bossman641]

I'm getting really exhausted by this witch hunt...

Witch hunt? It's not like anyone is twisting his words. It's also not like RG is backing down from his POV. I would just like an example so I get a better idea of where he is coming from.

[retailguy]

Ted hides behind secrecy at unnecessary times. I do not believe that communicating fairly with the media, even on occasion, would harm this team. Yet, it goes on and on and on.

I believe it speaks to his character. That's why I said what I said. Would be happy to be wrong, but I've been watching it for 4 years now and it doesn't change. I honestly think he enjoys saying nothing. The fact he does it for no reason (or very little reason) pisses me off.


For an otherwise rational guy, this is kinda crazy. He's in introvert. That's not a character flaw. I don't understand how you can watch a few clips of the guy and project Voldemort levels of evil onto the poor guy. Ted's making you kinda nutty. Just look at this thread.

An Introvert? :lol:

So, introverts purposely lie and mislead? :P

Yes, he's an introvert. Yes, his media personna will never be great. Plenty of introverts do just fine with the media and don't find it necessary to lie or mislead. They certainly don't smirk at them after they lie and mislead.

:lol: You're killing me Scott.

Lie and mislead? Okay, I will bite. Please provide one example of a Lie from Ted Thompson. Mislead? Maybe, but then it is important to the job to hide your intentions in many issues from the other GMs in the NFL. (and no it won't work for TT to just email his intentions to just the Packer fans)

Seconded. I would like to see an example of TT lying to the media. Does he give them nothing? Yes. Does he speak in generalities and say nothing? Yes.

I'd say he is consistent.

I tired of the "prove it" game a long time ago. Ted's foibles with the media are well documented. Whether either of you agree with my term "lie" or your terms "saying nothing" or "mislead", I don't particularly care.

The overall point was not so much that it was a lie (although I believe that), it was the lack of necessity to "lie", "mislead" or "say nothing". I don't believe that the team gains any competitive advantage from it, I recognize that you may believe that however. I also notice that frequently when he does it, he smiles sarcastically.

Justin thinks he is direct. I think he is purposefully indirect, and therefore misleading. A purposefully miseleading statement is a lie.

So, that's my POV and I'm sticking to it. He doesn't give interviews frequently, but you could probably pull up almost any interview you'd like and see examples of what I'm talking about.

[retailguy]

I'm getting really exhausted by this witch hunt...

Witch hunt? It's not like anyone is twisting his words. It's also not like RG is backing down from his POV. I would just like an example so I get a better idea of where he is coming from.

I don't think either cheesner or Bossman are on a witch hunt. However, there have been ample personal attacks in this thread. It is clear which posters are engaging in those attacks, and in spite of their insistence to the contrary I believe it shows. If anyone cares or not may be a different issue altogether.

I understand the "want" for me to support the statement, and I believe I have, and have been very clear why I have the POV that I do. I'm not interested in getting into the technical difference between "lie" "mislead" and "say nothing", much less the respective merits or issues with them once you've decided on your "technically correct terminology".

At the end of the day, I don't like it, and don't respect it, and you folks may side with Justin. Makes no difference to me either way.

[RashanGary]

Come on, RG. Back off the cliff. There are no sides here. You came here with an agenda to prove a point. You did it a backhanded way. We sniffed it out. Many people danced around your attempt to pigeon hole us, sensing there was an alterior motive. There was. Now you're calling Ted a liar.

Come on, man. This isn't some big drama with good guys and bad guys. This is a conversation about the Packers GM, that's it.

I don't care if anyone is on my side or yours for that matter.

[retailguy]

Come on, RG. Back off the cliff. There are no sides here. You came here with an agenda to prove a point. You did it a backhanded way. We sniffed it out. Many people danced around your attempt to pigeon hole us, sensing there was an alterior motive. There was. Now you're calling Ted a liar.

Come on, man. This isn't some big drama with good guys and bad guys. This is a conversation about the Packers GM, that's it.

I don't care if anyone is on my side or yours for that matter.

You're still on the conspiracy kick? For heavens sake give it up. I don't know how to be more clear than I am.

My conversation wasn't about the Packers GM, it was about the 2010 Packers season and my expectations. 99% of my words in this thread relate to that.

[RashanGary]

ok, then it's over. Let's move on. It's not a fight. Nothings wrong. Let's just move on.

[get louder at lambeau]

Just be glad you don't work with the guy.

[RashanGary]

haha. The last few days have been drama after drama. Why is everyone gone. Ted's a liar. This strange drama that was never a drama. . . .

For fucks sake, let's get back to football. You got us, RG. Just move on.

[cheesner]

I'm getting really exhausted by this witch hunt...

Witch hunt? It's not like anyone is twisting his words. It's also not like RG is backing down from his POV. I would just like an example so I get a better idea of where he is coming from.

I don't think either cheesner or Bossman are on a witch hunt. However, there have been ample personal attacks in this thread. It is clear which posters are engaging in those attacks, and in spite of their insistence to the contrary I believe it shows. If anyone cares or not may be a different issue altogether.

I understand the "want" for me to support the statement, and I believe I have, and have been very clear why I have the POV that I do. I'm not interested in getting into the technical difference between "lie" "mislead" and "say nothing", much less the respective merits or issues with them once you've decided on your "technically correct terminology".

At the end of the day, I don't like it, and don't respect it, and you folks may side with Justin. Makes no difference to me either way.

Yes. There are lots of personal attacks in this thread that you are making. You can call TT a bad GM because of his methods, that's your opinion. But when you attack him personally, making stuff up, that is wrong. You are correct that he doesn't tell the truth, that does not make him a liar. No GM is expected to give a hard analysis of their team. Do you really expect him to openly discuss weaknesses of his team and players? That would be akin to announcing at the beginning of a poker hand 'I only have pocket 3s. If I don't get a 3 on the flop - I will fold"

I just think it flat out wrong for you to attack him for this.

[falco]

FWIW, the interviews I've seen with TT generally made him seem like a pleasant individual. I agree he uses double speak to answer their questions, but I don't object to this.

He could be a total asshole for all I know, but then again I don't really care. He's a very good GM that has kept GB from falling off the map when #4 left.

[pbmax]

Ending a season 7-1 does silence some folks. For others it raises the question of why can't this team start a season strong? That's a few year "trend" here in GB, and I don't think that anyone can put a finger on it as to "why".


This is actually worth a threath of its own; I am no expert, only been into the game for 9 or so years. But in that time, I've seen 6-0 teams miss the playoffs. I think, and I've read, that latter 8 games is far more important to a ball club than the previous. I aint gonna dig up stats, but I truly believe, a strong finish is more valuable thatn a fast start.
That's true, but you can bury yourself with a bad start. Losing two in a row at the start of the season (one normally a home game) has a terrible track record of making the playoffs.

So once you MAKE the playoffs, its far better to be hot late than early.

Back on topic: I am officially concerned about both CB and pass rush. Specifically the shoulder harness for Jones. That isn't a fashion accessory.

Not worried about the holder. We are going to need to outscore some folks. The good news is that Capers has buried whatever wrinkles he has laid out for the team and not exposed them in the preseason. That should buy us some time.

[falco]

Good point PB. Holder shouldn't be an issue when the kicker is only doing PATs.

[retailguy]

You are correct that he doesn't tell the truth, that does not make him a liar.

:P

Ok, Cheesner, I've been speaking English my whole life. If you aren't telling the truth, you ARE lying.

I know that you're maintaining that Ted has reasons to lie. If he's protecting a "secret" or "gaining a competitive advantage", I'd agree with you. I've already dealt with this, but I am of the opinion that most of the time it is unnecessary for him to do that. Wolf would occasionally mislead folks because he needed to, and sometimes he was just candid and told the truth.

Ted doesn't do that often, and believe it or not, I'm not attacking him personally. He's made this a part of his job. I have no earthly idea what he does with the folks he goes to dinner and a movie with.

No where did I say that I expect him to give a hard analysis of his team. Plenty of those softball questions the GB reporters used to ask are answered evasively. There's just no need for that.

[superfan]

We are going to need to outscore some folks.

This is one of my concerns. Last season GB went 11-0 when holding teams under 30 points, and 0-5 when the D gave up over 30. Even in those losses GB managed to put a respectable number of points on the board - 24, 23, 26, 28, 36. The team only scored less than 20 points in a game once all season (17-7 win vs Dallas), and the offensive prognosis is even better for this season.

The playoff debacle was yet another example of an inability to win a shootout.

All I ask is that the defense finds a way to keep opponent points allowed under 30. Shouldn't be too much to ask. If they are able to do so, should be a fine season.

A side note about that crazy stat and those games - last year we generally had a pretty good idea about midway through the 2nd quarter whether or not it was going to be "one of those days". I've done some math on this - in the 11 wins, GB averaged 3.5 points allowed in the first half. In the 5 losses, GB averaged almost 19.5 points allowed in the first half. 39 total first half points allowed in 11 victories, 97 total first half points allowed in 5 losses. Offensive production is practically statistically irrelevant.

In the postseason, true to form, 24 first half points allowed to Arizona in the playoffs, resulting in a loss.

One year of data is hardly enough to generate statistically accurate results, yet the swing is significant enough to be disturbing. We need the defense to show up in the first half of games on a consistent basis to be successful.

[vince]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfbAFgD2mLo

[MJZiggy]

Good heavens, people! Take it to FYI or something.

Also, my biggest concern still remains in the kicking game. Crosby needs a holder and I worry about the punt coverage unit. Great that the Chery kid got a touchdown, but we need to make sure that every punt returner we face doesn't do the same thing. Field position is everything.

[Fritz]

Going back to an earlier theme in this thread - why is anyone concerned when so many have been so pro-Ted? - I see in another thread that Bigby and Harris are going on the PUP list for the first six games. And then can start practicing.

Harris is not a surprise. No question. But Bigby, once he signed the tender, was thought to be ready to work his way back in. Most Rats had Bigby starting ahead of Burnett, giving the young guy a chance to watch and learn and play ST (not Skin, though). Blackmon too was thought to be progressing pretty well medically. The point is, at that point the team seemed to have reasonable safety depth.

Well, that's shot to hell now. And I am concerned about depth at safety now. But that was partly due to the injury stuff. You could argue TT shoulda known, but had he gone out and spent the draft pick to acquire a starting caliber or strong backup safety, then what would the team have done if Blackmon and Bigby had progressed as expected? It woulda been a pickle.

Maybe corner is an area that Ted might've seen coming. My guess is that he thought Underwood and Lee were going to step it up this year. But they haven't. Is that a mis-assessment of their skill levels? It could be. It sure could be. Could be though that Lee's injuries have cost him speed or quickness, and Underwood's injury is slowing him down.

But the test will be in the next two weeks. Will TT make a move to improve the defensive backfield or the linebacking corps? He's got Jason Spitz, maybe Donald Lee, and some future draft choices to play with.

[superfan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfbAFgD2mLo

One of my all time favorite movie scenes. Need to watch the entire movie for full context and effect.

Ol' Val has added about a buck and change since that movie.

[superfan]

Gotta comment on one of retailguy's statements in this long ass and mostly preposterous thread.


I'm critical of ignoring free agency, especially with the lower tier guys. Not much risk there, and might give competition.

I've HATED the lackidasical approach to the OL, absolutely DESPISED it. It has taken far too long to field a competitive squad there. There was no reason for it. I firmly believe that responsibility for the slow starts the past two seasons rest firmly with the OL.

These statements back to back are contradictory. We have a comment that TT ignores free agency, especially lower tier guys, followed by a comment about the lack of commitment to the OL. Yet in TT's first year, following the regrettable release of Wahle and Rivera, TT targeted exactly those lower tier guys in Klemm and O'Dwyer. Very forgettable names in the annals of Packer lore.

While I would also like to see more targeting of the lower tier FAs, the track record of success just isn't there. TT has mostly failed with these blue light specials. Too lazy to look all of them up, but additional FA/trade names at various positions like Gardner, Boerigter, Preston, Anthony Smith, Giordano, Marquand Manuel come to mind. I'm sure there are others. There have been a few hits in trade/FA - Grant, and to a lesser extent Bigby, Gado briefly. Etc. But I think we can all agree that the misses outnumber the hits at this level. Whether that is the fault specifically of TT, coaching, or the strategy in general, I don't know.

I'm no therapist, but I have a feeling that if we got retailguy on the couch and worked everything through, his despise of TT would have roots in his decision to let Wahle and Rivera go in his first season as GM, thus contributing to OL issues for years to come.

P.S. - I am completely in agreement with retailguy's last sentence in the quote above - the slow starts are on the backs of the slow gelling of the OL. That, and the defense's inability to contain opposing offenses in the first half as stated by me previously in this thread.

[MJZiggy]

Gotta comment on one of retailguy's statements in this long ass and mostly preposterous thread.


I'm critical of ignoring free agency, especially with the lower tier guys. Not much risk there, and might give competition.

I've HATED the lackidasical approach to the OL, absolutely DESPISED it. It has taken far too long to field a competitive squad there. There was no reason for it. I firmly believe that responsibility for the slow starts the past two seasons rest firmly with the OL.

These statements back to back are contradictory. We have a comment that TT ignores free agency, especially lower tier guys, followed by a comment about the lack of commitment to the OL. Yet in TT's first year, following the regrettable release of Wahle and Rivera, TT targeted exactly those lower tier guys in Klemm and O'Dwyer. Very forgettable names in the annals of Packer lore.

While I would also like to see more targeting of the lower tier FAs, the track record of success just isn't there. TT has mostly failed with these blue light specials. Too lazy to look all of them up, but additional FA/trade names at various positions like Gardner, Boerigter, Preston, Anthony Smith, Giordano, Marquand Manuel come to mind. I'm sure there are others. There have been a few hits in trade/FA - Grant, and to a lesser extent Bigby, Gado briefly. Etc. But I think we can all agree that the misses outnumber the hits at this level. Whether that is the fault specifically of TT, coaching, or the strategy in general, I don't know.

I'm no therapist, but I have a feeling that if we got retailguy on the couch and worked everything through, his despise of TT would have roots in his decision to let Wahle and Rivera go in his first season as GM, thus contributing to OL issues for years to come.

P.S. - I am completely in agreement with retailguy's last sentence in the quote above - the slow starts are on the backs of the slow gelling of the OL. That, and the defense's inability to contain opposing offenses in the first half as stated by me previously in this thread.

Not to abruptly change the subject or anything, but I've just turned on the TV for more than 5 minutes for the first time in 4 months. Tom Brady sounds, and quite frankly right now looks like someone who should be leading the glee club instead of a major football franchise. (Does the fact that I'm watching Glee have anything to do with this?)

[Tarlam!]

quite frankly right now looks like someone who should be leading the glee club instead of a major football franchise. (Does the fact that I'm watching Glee have anything to do with this?)

I gotta ask; What's Glee?

[Freak Out]

Has our defensive backfield improved since the Arizona loss?

[Joemailman]

Has our defensive backfield improved since the Arizona loss?

Hard to say. Burnett is more talented than Bigby, but he is a rookie. The nickel/dime situation is a big question mark. Question mark doesn't necessarily mean bad, but time will tell.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm no therapist, but I have a feeling that if we got retailguy on the couch and worked everything through, his despise of TT would have roots in his decision to let Wahle and Rivera go in his first season as GM, thus contributing to OL issues for years to come.

Good points. My money is on it having to do with Brent Farve. All things come back to Brent.

[Deputy Nutz]

I hate Bigby, horrible coverage, and horrible instincts, but to replace him with a third round pick, it is hard to say that the Packers secondary got any better from the Arizona loss.

With Harris and Bigby going on the PUP list this team's weakest group just got a whole lot weaker. Sam Shield matched up against Percy Harvin, groovy.

[MJZiggy]

quite frankly right now looks like someone who should be leading the glee club instead of a major football franchise. (Does the fact that I'm watching Glee have anything to do with this?)

I gotta ask; What's Glee?

Inane TV show about a high school glee club where they can't seem to go 5 minutes without bursting into chorus songs. It's a long story but it just ended up on.

[Fritz]

This is getting to be like an episode of "Lost." We're back to Jarrett Bush as the most experienced backup cornerback on the team..

I think somebody - TT, MM? - overestimated the jump that Underwood and Lee would take. To have two critical guys at the same position let you down....that sucks goat balls. Big, smelly ones.

[ThunderDan]

This is getting to be like an episode of "Lost." We're back to Jarrett Bush as the most experienced backup cornerback on the team..

I think somebody - TT, MM? - overestimated the jump that Underwood and Lee would take. To have two critical guys at the same position let you down....that sucks goat balls. Big, smelly ones.

We did survive a couple of years with TBuck and Vinnie "Burn'em" Clark.

You really have to hope that one or more of the young CB has the light go on in the regular season and step-up their play to an NFL level.

This could be a shoot out year. But I have some faith that our D will be top 10 and that we will have a solid season.

[retailguy]

This is getting to be like an episode of "Lost." We're back to Jarrett Bush as the most experienced backup cornerback on the team..

I think somebody - TT, MM? - overestimated the jump that Underwood and Lee would take. To have two critical guys at the same position let you down....that sucks goat balls. Big, smelly ones.

We have two good safties and they'll have to help. The #3 and #4 corners had better learn fast. And, the biggest unknown, how can Dom scheme away from our weaknesses?

Gotta play'em guys, and it isn't really a whole lot different than how we did it in prior years, is it? This is the way Ted rolls.

Gonna still be a great season, I believe that.

PS - No way in hell we're finding a #3 corner on cut down day. Only possibillity is a trade and there are too many teams with weak corner situations. We got what we got!

[mraynrand]

This is getting to be like an episode of "Lost." We're back to Jarrett Bush as the most experienced backup cornerback on the team..

I think somebody - TT, MM? - overestimated the jump that Underwood and Lee would take. To have two critical guys at the same position let you down....that sucks goat balls. Big, smelly ones.

When did you start letting Sinbasket use your account?

[Brandon494]

I'm guessing the secondary will struggle like te O-line last season but once Al Harris comes back I see the unit playing solid like when Tauscher came back last year. I'm guessing we will go 5-1 or 4-2 our first 6 games so I'm not too worried.

[red]

my biggest concern would be that the injury bug returns to c-wood and we end up with tramon as our #1 and lee, underwood or shields as our #2 and 3

to have both harris and woodson out would be the end of our season

[Merlin]

Concerns in order:

Special Teams - all of it from Crosby to punt coverage.

Secondary - It looks like it's in disarray.

Defensive Line - solid starters, no depth.

Offensive Line - for the first time in 6 years, we have an offensive line but the best talent isn't starting due to injury. Will the merry-go-round effect hurt us? Will Tauscher and Clifton hold up?

3-4 Defense - Are we in for a sophomore slump?

[cheesner]

Special Teams. Mostly the kick and punt coverage, I don't have a lot of confidence in our coaching staff there.

I think we will be fine at OLB and we will be pretty good at safety.


Mild concerns are 3rd and 4th CB. I am betting that at least one of our guys steps to the plate and is at least adequate.

Also a mild concern is the middle of our defense. I don't think the coverage ability of our LBs, especially the MLBs is adequate. They should be a better than last season, our safeties should be better in coverage, and I trust Dom to strategically improve this area.

[pbmax]

Cyril Obiozor was just mentioned by Bedard in the JSOBlog Blog as having a bigger and better impact at OLB than Zombo. Has anyone else noticed this? Or has Bedard been inhaling ink fumes at the printing facility again?

Because Obiozor could cause pass rush problems for some teams.

Shields versus Harvin is not the matchup I am concerned about. He is used to playing against the freakishly athletic and fast. Its Shields versus a veteran with a brain. That is where he will get burned.

[Fritz]

I am confused about that chart that he puts out. On the one hand, he claims that it says nothing about who's outperformng whom or how well anyone is doing - yet if that's not what the chart says, then what does it say? He says it's about who's "impactful" but is that not a measure of who's performing better?

I also noticed he cast a more negative light on Zombo based on MM's remarks. But I missed the part where he was pimping Obi.

[denverYooper]

I am confused about that chart that he puts out. On the one hand, he claims that it says nothing about who's outperformng whom or how well anyone is doing - yet if that's not what the chart says, then what does it say? He says it's about who's "impactful" but is that not a measure of who's performing better?

I also noticed he cast a more negative light on Zombo based on MM's remarks. But I missed the part where he was pimping Obi.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/101952533.html



Frank Zombo might have the flashy name and impeccable timing, but Cyril Obiozor continues to play better. He's more physical and plays with a fire.

[Cheesehead Craig]

My biggest concern is getting home from church in time to watch the game live. I know I can DVR it, but it's just not the same.

[Bossman641]

Cyril Obiozor was just mentioned by Bedard in the JSOBlog Blog as having a bigger and better impact at OLB than Zombo. Has anyone else noticed this? Or has Bedard been inhaling ink fumes at the printing facility again?

Because Obiozor could cause pass rush problems for some teams.

Shields versus Harvin is not the matchup I am concerned about. He is used to playing against the freakishly athletic and fast. Its Shields versus a veteran with a brain. That is where he will get burned.

I was wondering the same thing. Obiozor was one guy who I was expecting to really improve this offseason. Other than Bedard's comment, the guy has been a ghost.

[get louder at lambeau]

My biggest concern is getting home from church in time to watch the game live. I know I can DVR it, but it's just not the same.

That's easy to solve. Stop going to church. God won't even notice.

[Fritz]

I am confused about that chart that he puts out. On the one hand, he claims that it says nothing about who's outperformng whom or how well anyone is doing - yet if that's not what the chart says, then what does it say? He says it's about who's "impactful" but is that not a measure of who's performing better?

I also noticed he cast a more negative light on Zombo based on MM's remarks. But I missed the part where he was pimping Obi.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/101952533.html



Frank Zombo might have the flashy name and impeccable timing, but Cyril Obiozor continues to play better. He's more physical and plays with a fire.


Thank you. By the way, that is the first time I ever heard a linebacker descr4ibed with the word "impeccable."

[Cheesehead Craig]

My biggest concern is getting home from church in time to watch the game live. I know I can DVR it, but it's just not the same.

That's easy to solve. Stop going to church. God won't even notice.

Remember Vince said: God, family and then the Green Bay Packers.

[Fritz]

My biggest concern is getting home from church in time to watch the game live. I know I can DVR it, but it's just not the same.

That's easy to solve. Stop going to church. God won't even notice.

Remember Vince said: God, family and then the Green Bay Packers.

That guy had his priorities all mixed up.

[mraynrand]

I am confused about that chart that he puts out. On the one hand, he claims that it says nothing about who's outperformng whom or how well anyone is doing - yet if that's not what the chart says, then what does it say? He says it's about who's "impactful" but is that not a measure of who's performing better?

I also noticed he cast a more negative light on Zombo based on MM's remarks. But I missed the part where he was pimping Obi.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/101952533.html



Frank Zombo might have the flashy name and impeccable timing, but Cyril Obiozor continues to play better. He's more physical and plays with a fire.


Thank you. By the way, that is the first time I ever heard a linebacker descr4ibed with the word "impeccable."

A google search for "impeccable linebacker" brings up 147,000 hits, with your post being listed 8th (Perhaps if there are a lot of people looking for impeccable linebackers, the traffic to Packerrats might increase).

[get louder at lambeau]

My biggest concern is getting home from church in time to watch the game live. I know I can DVR it, but it's just not the same.

That's easy to solve. Stop going to church. God won't even notice.

Remember Vince said: God, family and then the Green Bay Packers.

That guy had his priorities all mixed up.

And that's why he's dead.

[Brandon494]

First three concerns had to make you laugh alittle

[swede]

I'm a little surprised by all the "concern" around here. This team is poised on the brink of greatness. Ted has installed his chosen players into each area of this team.

We need to accept the fact that if he thought we needed better players (especially starters) he'd have went out an acquired them.

There is no legitimate reason, especially at this point, for this team not to be successful. We should be competitive in every single game, and quite honestly should win the majority of them.

Every team has holes, after all this is the NFL. Our holes should not preclude us from a championship season!

...

[King Friday]

My biggest concern is getting home from church in time to watch the game live. I know I can DVR it, but it's just not the same.

Shouldn't be much of a problem this year...I think the majority of Packer games are late starts or primetime. Very few noon starts scheduled in 2011.

[Lurker64]

Until someone had bumped this thread, I had forgotten that Cyril Obiozor existed.

[pbmax]

I remembered Obiozor but I forgot that Retailguy should get the tremendous credit he deserves for his predictive capabilities! :D

He makes Bretsky's whammy look pale in comparison. Whether he was being serious or not, I leave to you dear posters.

[pbmax]

Injuries
Health
Injuries
and
Injuries

...pffffftppppbbbbbb...

Injuries, sminjuries.

[gbgary]

First three concerns had to make you laugh alittle

yup...in hindsight. my concern was pass rush (which was good) and it covering for an iffy secondary (which was fantastic). my concern for next season is...pass rush.