The Media and Thompson

[Fritz]

How perceptions have changed. Can you imagine the fans' and media's reaction say, two years ago, had these events occurred:

Packers make absolutely no attempt re-sign a defensive lineman who can sack the QB, they cut the guy who was their starting inside linebacker for eight or so years, they cut a venerable offensive tackle, they make no attempt to re-sign a starting left guard who hasn't missed a game, and they make zero effort to sign any free agents from other teams.

Holy smokes. The fans would've been howling, and the media would've been sniping like mad. But here's what the firth paragraph of an article in today's JSO had to say about the Packers not even making a play for Jenkins:

"The Packers easily could have afforded what the Eagles paid to Jenkins, but they have decided internally that they would rather spend their salary cap money on future free agents such as guard Josh Sitton, tight end Jermichael Finley and receiver Jordy Nelson. They also are confident second-year pros Mike Neal and C.J. Wilson can provide enough help on the defensive line to make up for Jenkins' departure."

Another article cast James Jones's not signing with anyone yet as a "smart" move the Packers made to let him test the market so they can re-sign him for a cheaper price. In the article, the Cards and Jets are listed as possible new suitors - along with the Packers. But there was no evidence given that the Packers were in fact involved in any negotiations.

Has TT earned this much trust from the press now? Or do they simply better understand the way Thompson sees the short and long term? Or something different altogether?

[Scott Campbell]

How would you not give the benefit of the doubt to the reigning champ?

[vince]

Most of the media, and JSO guys in particular, put their finger up in the wind to see which way it's blowing before they write anything.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I think winning the super bowl gets people off your back. Its really that simply I'd think. I don't think the media and fans would be as understanding about all these moves (or non-moves if you will) had TT yet to prove his way will win you the super bowl. For example, take Jenkins, had we not won the super bowl most people would be flipping out about not re-signing him. But now that we won the super bowl people try to see it from his perspective.

[Fritz]

Most of the media, and JSO guys in particular, put their finger up in the wind to see which way it's blowing before they write anything.

This is what I think. Previously, when the local media would be questioned as to their Ted-bashing, they fell back on that line that it's the media's job to be skeptical and questioning. That they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they didn't do that.

So what happened to that?

I'm not against them being less brutal than they had been, but wouldn't it at least be a good idea to let us know that, say, some source from within the organization confirms that the Packers' strategy with Jones was let the market settle then try to negotiate with Jones? And if there is no source, how do they know this was the Packers' strategy?

Before the SB, it seemed to me that many of the reporters locally made almost-bizarre allegations against Thompson's decision-making (was he really just "cheap"? Did he want Favre out so TT could establish his own legacy?). Now they're making equally almost bizarre allegations the other way ("Yeah, Ted knew no one would sign Jones right away and he could then enter the sweepstakes...").

It's weird.

[sheepshead]

Media yes, but could you imagine these forums?? yikes.

[pbmax]

Sports reporting is still subject to reasoning that is better suited to a grade school recess than a serious business. Its about on par with Cable TV News and the bottom end of political reporting.

Most reporters handle the factual stuff well. But they are constantly asked to become pundits by fans and make predictions and that is when the wheels fly off. They have no earthly idea (including McGinn, though he is the closest) what makes a successful team, other than the extremes of performance. If the Bengals or Dan Snyder do it, its bad. If Bill Belichick does it, it must be genius. And despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, football reporters still take their cues from Lombardi in the 60s and football in general in the 70s. I guarantee you that before training camp is out, we will once again read from a major publication how the Packers need to have a good/better run game to win in bad weather at home in December and January. Just you watch.

There would be little harm if they stuck to the same line of thinking and admitted when it came up short (Christl and his playmakers and knee benders theory). But even McGinn, who credited Wolf with showing him what a winning organization looks, like was slow to warm to Thompson's approach, despite its previous successful application in New England and Philly.

And so we are left with a gaggle of reporters who assign too much authority to finite success. If someone wins, their method must be correct. If you lose, then your method is flawed. Winning a Super Bowl is simply the other side of the coin that caused them to dismiss Thompson's methods in the first place.

[pbmax]

This is what I think. Previously, when the local media would be questioned as to their Ted-bashing, they fell back on that line that it's the media's job to be skeptical and questioning. That they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they didn't do that.

So what happened to that?

I'm not against them being less brutal than they had been, but wouldn't it at least be a good idea to let us know that, say, some source from within the organization confirms that the Packers' strategy with Jones was let the market settle then try to negotiate with Jones? And if there is no source, how do they know this was the Packers' strategy?

Before the SB, it seemed to me that many of the reporters locally made almost-bizarre allegations against Thompson's decision-making (was he really just "cheap"? Did he want Favre out so TT could establish his own legacy?). Now they're making equally almost bizarre allegations the other way ("Yeah, Ted knew no one would sign Jones right away and he could then enter the sweepstakes...").

It's weird.

Normally, when a team acts in a way different from conventional wisdom, that is precisely what the team wants to do, get their side of the story out. But a lack of proactive message control is the strangest thing about Thompson's tenure there is. And its a bit strange in this day and age that someone inside doesn't insist on better PR.

[Fritz]

Normally, when a team acts in a way different from conventional wisdom, that is precisely what the team wants to do, get their side of the story out. But a lack of proactive message control is the strangest thing about Thompson's tenure there is. And its a bit strange in this day and age that someone inside doesn't insist on better PR.

I agree. Thompson doesn't seem to care, at all, to get the team's point of view out there. I wonder if Ted actually thinks the team's record will do the talking.

[Partial]

Ted gave a pretty candid presser yesterday. He shed some light of the cuts.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/126480673.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

My stance is "In Ted we trust". He took us to the promised land, and is clearly a very good GM. I don't agree with everything he's done, I would have paid to keep Jenkins if the rumor of his contract are true, but I think he is one of the premiere guys in the league at what he does.

I do worry about his draft and development strategy when we're picking at the bottom of the rounds (damn success). Having said that, using 10 picks is a good idea as the bigger litter should result in a few winners.

[pbmax]

Holy smokes. The fans would've been howling, and the media would've been sniping like mad. But here's what the firth paragraph of an article in today's JSO had to say about the Packers not even making a play for Jenkins...


Media yes, but could you imagine these forums?? yikes.


Sheep also has a point. Go count the number of posters in the Free Agency thread who think Jenkins should have been resigned at the number he got from Philly. It was universally agreed in the lockout season he was going to get a monster payday due to his sack totals. Once his price dropped, that rationale disappeared and everyone wondered why TT hadn't acted. Its like the previous 5 years haven't happened.

In fact, two very competent posters opined that Thompson is too rigid and ideological (my words) with his system and at times, it hurts the team.

[Patler]

Before last year TT was often described as "cheap" and "stubborn".
Now I see descriptions like "patient" and "calculating".
Yes, I think winning a Super Bowl might have influenced that!!!

[vince]

This reminds me of the time Bob McGinn asked Thompson if there was enough intelligence in the room... Not to hard to believe he'd shut down after reporter stupidity like that...

[pbmax]

This reminds me of the time Bob McGinn asked Thompson if there was enough intelligence in the room... Not to hard to believe he'd shut down after reporter stupidity like that...

Yes, I think McGinn or Christl openly questioned whether McCarthy was smart enough compared to Holmgren. Which is another problem, Holmgren (and Wolf) charmed and bullied the socks off the press, neither of the current two do that. But those traits are secondary to actual football success and they are easily confused.

[Old School]

http://www3.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=658952

Here's an article from 2007 on Ted. In light of what has transpired since, this gives some great insight into TT the person.