OLD ISSUE: REBUILDING?

[TOP HAT]

Ultimately, the debates on the forums come down to a major concern:


As Packnut said about TT's press conference in another topic, "The big problem I fear is the # of fans who just take for granted that he should have a few years to prove himself. They accept losing and being embarrassed like Monday night. For them it's natural to have "re-building years". I have seen enough to know that TT is a clown who does'nt have a clue. This guy lives in a fantasy world where O lineman are a dime a dozen. I also agree that the Sherman excuse is over. This is TT's team and he's had ample time."


My postscript: I can remember when pro football forecasters used to call the Pack rebuilding a joke before BF's era and getting new management era.


This is the ultimate concern looking down the road for 2-5 years. I am not sure that the fans can wait 2-3 years for a playoff contending team. Further, I would like BF to go out with a winning season or two.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I admit that I am starting to get very fustrated with TT. I thought he was doing good, but the woodson signing and the two years of not replacing at least one of our guards has me worried. Am just trying to be patient and at least give him this year, but if I don't see good things from his rookie class of this year and his second year players, than I will think that this guy needs to go.

[Tony Oday]

I like what we are doing we are creating another 'window' you know like the one we missed when 4th and inches was a punt...

[MJZiggy]

I admit that I am starting to get very fustrated with TT. I thought he was doing good, but the woodson signing and the two years of not replacing at least one of our guards has me worried. Am just trying to be patient and at least give him this year, but if I don't see good things from his rookie class of this year and his second year players, than I will think that this guy needs to go.

As I recall, when the Woodson signing happened, everyone loved the idea and was overjoyed. No it's a mistake? How come it wasn't a mistake when it happened? I'm still saying let's see what happens during the real season before we start vigilante activities.

[Packnut]

Having lived through the 70's and 80's, I'm sure my opinion differ's from the younger guys here who have no idea about the ineptitude that went on back then. For some of them, may-be re-building is a natural course of events and they would view my opinions as "over-reacting".

My arguement centers on recognizing the mistakes when they are made and they stem from the top. Let's all be honest here. If Harlan had not made the 1 right move in hiring Wolf, his tenure would have been a complete and utter disaster.

I firmly believe in the saying that those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it and Harlan is a perfect example. First we lose a damn fine coach in Holmgren because he wanted more power. Then Harlan gives a guy who had NOTHING in his track record all the power that eventually proves to be a fatal mistake.

Which brings us to where we stand today. I don't believe there was any history in which TT was warranted getting picked as our GM. Harlan has a fatal flaw and that is accepting other's opinion's that he bases his decision's on. While Wolf was a tremendous evaluator of player talent, other than Holmgren, his coaching and GM evaluations suck. If my memory is right, Harlan had input from Wolf on Rhodes, Sherman and Thompson.

Some here have credited TT with the drafts in Seattle and their success and I believe it is un-warranted. A large part of it was their QB maturation process which is all on Holmgren. Plus, we have no idea how much input Holmgren had on TT's picks.

Now we havea HC who had NOTHING in his background that warranted his being picked by TT other than the fact that it's easier for a GM to have total control when he has a rookie HC with no experience. We are on very dangerous ground here because this simple 2-3 yr re-building program can backfire into 5-6 yrs.

My question is are we all going to be here at some future point saying the new GM is gonna have to recover from what TT did like we have made that excuse for TT in regards to Sherman?

[Astonishment]

Another key is that offensive lines take a while to gel. I would take a line of average players that have played together of a few years over an all-star line that has not played together. I agree with Thomson on the importance of top talent at the guard spots. It is not that guards are a dime-a-dozen; however it is true you can't allocate that much cap space to guards because of how much the skill position players command. TT's offensive line moves look bad right now (last years moves were and will remain terrible), but the true judge of how good they are will be how they look in two years. I am not saying you have to give TT a two year pass because the team should be able to see improvement over this next year. It is much like planting a tree you don't see the results immediately, but the roots are establishing themselves long before you see the tree start to grow. The development for an offensive line is much the same way. That is why yearly offensive line suddenly "become good" after years of being below average with no significant talent upgrade.

"Mike Wahle is terrible", "more like Mike turn-style Wahle", "why are they starting Flanigan - he sucks we need Winters back"(these are both after he switched to guard), "that’s what you get when you start two rookie tackles, they'll never be any good", "Rivera will never amount to anything, he's injury prone and always will be" - I have heard all these comments only to see people suddenly change their tune to "we can't afford to lose Wahl - give him 10 million a year", "Rivera is the best guard in football", "there isn't a better tackle tandem than Tauscher and Clifton", "man are we screwed when Flanigan retires".

All of these are premature over-reactions, and so is what is going on right now. This new line will go through the same growing pains that the past lines have, and will probably develop into a good unit if they get the time to.

[MJZiggy]

Packnut, I doubt it. Even if TT turned out to be the anti-GM, there isn't anything any of us could do about it anyway (at least not without risking life imprisonment). He is the GM, it is his ship to run, and, actually, I'm rather happy with how he's running it. Let me ask you this: if Wolf is the one bright spot in Harlan's tenure and he's a great talent evaluator, then what leads you to believe that Wolf's faith in TT's talent is misplaced? This is not the 80's (thank God) and the league doesn't run the same way as it did then.

[mngolf19]

I will say that I am shocked at the seeming lack of effort to send Favre off with a winner. I am a fan of Brett and it just seems wrong for him to go out on such a bad note.

[Packnut]

Another key is that offensive lines take a while to gel. I would take a line of average players that have played together of a few years over an all-star line that has not played together. I agree with Thomson on the importance of top talent at the guard spots. It is not that guards are a dime-a-dozen; however it is true you can't allocate that much cap space to guards because of how much the skill position players command. TT's offensive line moves look bad right now (last years moves were and will remain terrible), but the true judge of how good they are will be how they look in two years. I am not saying you have to give TT a two year pass because the team should be able to see improvement over this next year. It is much like planting a tree you don't see the results immediately, but the roots are establishing themselves long before you see the tree start to grow. The development for an offensive line is much the same way. That is why yearly offensive line suddenly "become good" after years of being below average with no significant talent upgrade.

"Mike Wahle is terrible", "more like Mike turn-style Wahle", "why are they starting Flanigan - he sucks we need Winters back"(these are both after he switched to guard), "that’s what you get when you start two rookie tackles, they'll never be any good", "Rivera will never amount to anything, he's injury prone and always will be" - I have heard all these comments only to see people suddenly change their tune to "we can't afford to lose Wahl - give him 10 million a year", "Rivera is the best guard in football", "there isn't a better tackle tandem than Tauscher and Clifton", "man are we screwed when Flanigan retires".

All of these are premature over-reactions, and so is what is going on right now. This new line will go through the same growing pains that the past lines have, and will probably develop into a good unit if they get the time to.

Your point is well-taken about O line needing time. My problem with it is an O line with 2 rookies is gonna take even more time and my arguement is we should'nt have been in this position to begin with. Also what has TT done with the O line that warrants ANY hope for the future? His answer last season for the O line was HORRIBLE. Correct me if I'm wrong, but his #2 pick of the draft this season is'nt good enough to beat out Moll?

[BallHawk]

Even if TT turned out to be the anti-GM, there isn't anything any of us could do about it anyway (at least not without risking life imprisonment).

Some things just have to be done. :twisted:

[Packnut]

Packnut, I doubt it. Even if TT turned out to be the anti-GM, there isn't anything any of us could do about it anyway (at least not without risking life imprisonment). He is the GM, it is his ship to run, and, actually, I'm rather happy with how he's running it. Let me ask you this: if Wolf is the one bright spot in Harlan's tenure and he's a great talent evaluator, then what leads you to believe that Wolf's faith in TT's talent is misplaced? This is not the 80's (thank God) and the league doesn't run the same way as it did then.


The fact that he was so wrong about the O line last season and the way things are now is very disturbing. I mean he did'nt even make 50-50 last season. He was wrong about both guys. Now his #2 pick can't beat out Moll?

He gives an average DE a huge contract but does'nt even make an attempt at a skill position with Walker? Kampman might not even be out there on 3rd downs so we have 1 DE who can't generate a pass rush and another who can't stop the run. It's to helter-skelter with TT. There are just way to manny red flags. As far as what we can do about it. Don't under-estimate the will of the fans. GB is a small town and the Packer brass will hear the anger.

[Astonishment]

Another key is that offensive lines take a while to gel. I would take a line of average players that have played together of a few years over an all-star line that has not played together. I agree with Thomson on the importance of top talent at the guard spots. It is not that guards are a dime-a-dozen; however it is true you can't allocate that much cap space to guards because of how much the skill position players command. TT's offensive line moves look bad right now (last years moves were and will remain terrible), but the true judge of how good they are will be how they look in two years. I am not saying you have to give TT a two year pass because the team should be able to see improvement over this next year. It is much like planting a tree you don't see the results immediately, but the roots are establishing themselves long before you see the tree start to grow. The development for an offensive line is much the same way. That is why yearly offensive line suddenly "become good" after years of being below average with no significant talent upgrade.

"Mike Wahle is terrible", "more like Mike turn-style Wahle", "why are they starting Flanigan - he sucks we need Winters back"(these are both after he switched to guard), "that’s what you get when you start two rookie tackles, they'll never be any good", "Rivera will never amount to anything, he's injury prone and always will be" - I have heard all these comments only to see people suddenly change their tune to "we can't afford to lose Wahl - give him 10 million a year", "Rivera is the best guard in football", "there isn't a better tackle tandem than Tauscher and Clifton", "man are we screwed when Flanigan retires".

All of these are premature over-reactions, and so is what is going on right now. This new line will go through the same growing pains that the past lines have, and will probably develop into a good unit if they get the time to.

Your point is well-taken about O line needing time. My problem with it is an O line with 2 rookies is gonna take even more time and my arguement is we should'nt have been in this position to begin with. Also what has TT done with the O line that warrants ANY hope for the future? His answer last season for the O line was HORRIBLE. Correct me if I'm wrong, but his #2 pick of the draft this season is'nt good enough to beat out Moll?

1) I agree that we shouldn't be in this position, but I wouldn't put that on TT's shoulders. When he took over the cabinet was completely bare behind Wahl and Rivera. As for letting those two go, when TT took over Wahle was already determined to test FA (he has since tried to semi refute that, but it would have still broke the bank long term to keep him), and once he hit FA it would have been ridiculous to match what he got. However I was firmly in favor of not letting Rivera get to FA, because I believe he would have re-signed for much less. In hind sight that would have been a poor choice, because Rivera's age has shown since he left and he is only a shell of what he was when he was here.

2) I completely agree that TT's moves last season were terrible, but considering the cap situation, they were the right kind of low risk moves needed, just the wrong players.

3) As for Moll beating out College, I think everyone is disappointed, but it is much better to make a correction as soon as it is noticed, than to stick a guy in just because he was picked sooner (See Carroll over Thomas - while neither was very good Thomas was consistently better in practice, but Carroll started because of draft position).

[Packnut]

I apologize for being so negative, but this whole situation has me really bummed out right now, and if you've watched any sports shows you'll know Monday night made us a joke in the NFL. The radio guys here in Chicago have ripped the Pack due to Mon night. I know we don't have the talent for a super bowl but at least field a competitive team.

[retailguy]

Let me ask you this: if Wolf is the one bright spot in Harlan's tenure and he's a great talent evaluator, then what leads you to believe that Wolf's faith in TT's talent is misplaced? This is not the 80's (thank God) and the league doesn't run the same way as it did then.


Zig,

I'm not packnut, however, I'm going to "give it the old school try"... First off, I rather enjoyed the 80's, with the exception of Packer football, so lay off on us "old guys". :wink:

Second, Wolf had nothing but praise for Mike Sherman too, and to a lot of people here (I am not one of them), they think Sherman is the Anti-Christ.

I, like pacnut, don't want to return to the 80's with regard to football, however, I do think it is inevitable but to rebuild once in a while. We had a 14 year run. That's a LONG time. Credit goes to Holmgren, Wolf, AND Sherman. Not many teams can stay viable that long.

I have not given up on TT at this point, it is way too early, however, he hasn't quite got the focus on the OL & DL that Mike Sherman had. Sherman always had good lines, because it was all he really cared about. His success on the DL was not what it was on the OL, but you can't say he didn't try.

TT seems in NO HURRY to build anything. While the long term focus is a very good thing, typically, it is sad to see Favre "ushered" out of the spotlight. There is no focus to "build quickly". I guess some fans could find that frustrating.

I do think, however, TT has been a bit disingenuous with the "we're not rebuilding" comments. It hasn't won him any accolades with me, that's for sure.

[Packnut]

Astonishment- see this is where I have a problem with TT's priorities and his understanding of football. I will admit that the Wahle thing sticks in my gut. He was'nt a priority and there was no money for him but there was for Kampman? At this point, who would have had more value to the team?

The cap space could have been worked out with Wahle contrary to what anyone says. This guy was one of the top 3 at his position and TT got NOTHING for him. I dis-agree that he was'nt worth the money. Why did Green have the best short yardage stats a few yrs back? Because running behind Mike was MONEY! Wahle was worth every penny he got, just ask the Panthers RB's.

TT should have backloaded a contract with guarenteed money. The signing bonus could have been structured to fit the cap space by offering him more in the 2nd year. We do have 8 mill sitting here don't we?

[Packnut]

Let me ask you this: if Wolf is the one bright spot in Harlan's tenure and he's a great talent evaluator, then what leads you to believe that Wolf's faith in TT's talent is misplaced? This is not the 80's (thank God) and the league doesn't run the same way as it did then.


Zig,

I'm not packnut, however, I'm going to "give it the old school try"... First off, I rather enjoyed the 80's, with the exception of Packer football, so lay off on us "old guys". :wink:

Second, Wolf had nothing but praise for Mike Sherman too, and to a lot of people here (I am not one of them), they think Sherman is the Anti-Christ.

I, like pacnut, don't want to return to the 80's with regard to football, however, I do think it is inevitable but to rebuild once in a while. We had a 14 year run. That's a LONG time. Credit goes to Holmgren, Wolf, AND Sherman. Not many teams can stay viable that long.

I have not given up on TT at this point, it is way too early, however, he hasn't quite got the focus on the OL & DL that Mike Sherman had. Sherman always had good lines, because it was all he really cared about. His success on the DL was not what it was on the OL, but you can't say he didn't try.

TT seems in NO HURRY to build anything. While the long term focus is a very good thing, typically, it is sad to see Favre "ushered" out of the spotlight. There is no focus to "build quickly". I guess some fans could find that frustrating.

I do think, however, TT has been a bit disingenuous with the "we're not rebuilding" comments. It hasn't won him any accolades with me, that's for sure.

You answered it better than i could have. Your right, the 80's were ok except for football. LOL!

[RashanGary]

It's going to take a little time. The Packers are starting over from scratch. Thompson has a long record of being around successfull drafts. He has been a big part of the construction of more than one Super Bowl level franchise. He speaks of seeing the big picture, understanding value from each draft pick as opposed to taking lesser players for need. He also appears to have a sound, NE like approach to cap management.

He scrapped Sherman and all of his players and started over. It's going to take at least another rough year. Probably not as rough as last year, but rough.

I didn't like the Woodson signing from day one and I didn't like Wahle leaving. Other than that, he's done a darn good job and the area where he is strongest, the draft, won't start to pay off untill a couple years down the road. It's all about patients unless your Brett Favre and your 37 year old ankles won't make it that far.

[MJZiggy]

RG, let me clarify. The "thank God" of my previous post was a reference specifically to football only. The 80's were an interesting time in my life. In case you've forgotten, I am not the youngest member here either :wink: :sad: :sad:

[Tony Oday]

I think we have already seen the cycle of football teams in a microcosm in the last 14 years here. We started building a solid corp of young players and key FA aquisitions that panned out. The young guys grew, and grew and came into their own in the mid 90's. Played along time at a high level and then after the debacle of the 4th and 26 it was over. The window had shut. The backloaded contracts caught up to the team and we needed an infusion of talent to build around again. That is where we are now. We will go into next year with another 35 million to spend on rookies and FA.

Think about this: Favre returns next year, Jennings keeps progressing, Driver stay solid, the offensive line gels because they have had a year of tough knocks, the defense matures with Hawk learning the NFL game, Hodge supplanting Barnett after Barnett gets a nice contract and is moved outside, the secondary gels as a team with three stud CB and three stud Safties. Thats what is building right now.

Well what we lack here is on the defensive line a third WR and RB. RB we have a young stable that is more of a running back by comitte which I HATE and the D line cant get a pass rush with 4 guys but follow me on this:

RB that is a priority and we draft accordingly. Get a nice RB taht shares the load for a year with Green on his way to eclipse Green 10 games deep into the season with a tough new fullback Gado. Boom nice backfield that can play ala mid 90's Packers with Bennett and Levens.

WR-Driver and Jennings LOCK IT UP! and are a solid 1,2 combo. Draft in the second round or pick up a nice FA at WR ala Andre Rison. T.O. anyone? A guy that has a checkered past looking to regain NFL glory and a ring. Then we have three good WR.

DL-Pickett is the fat boy that Brown was. Jenkins is the santana Dotson slimmer but can get a pass rush. KGB is Sean Jones, not elite but solid enough to beat 1v1 coverage and then signing a STUD DE...oh yeah there is one available next year...FREENEY!

TT log in under your alias here and look at the plan I have jsut mapped out and follow it please ;)

[RashanGary]

I liked the first paragraph Tony Oday. I don't think you can make a direct plan. You don't know who's going to be there with their 1st round pick. It coudl just happen to be a super high value RB who starts and makes a difference in year 1. It could be a DE who we don't need as much, but could help a whole hell of alot at rushing the passer and fatigue. You can't force the draft and for that matter, you can't force FA. It's all about value and patients. When value arises, grab it, if it's not there, wait. When you wait, you lose in the short term but in a cause and effect world, those decisions pay off in the long run or with the big picture in mind.

Just a bunch of good solid draft picks and a successfull off season without bad contracts would make me happy. Do I know what position? Not really, but I think Thompson has the ability to make the right ones and be patient enough not to make the bad ones.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I didn't like the Woodson signing from day one and I didn't like Wahle leaving. Other than that, he's done a darn good job and the area where he is strongest, the draft, won't start to pay off untill a couple years down the road. It's all about patients unless your Brett Favre and your 37 year old ankles won't make it that far.

I did like the Woodson signing when it first happen because as with all fans I get incited when I think of this team competing again. However, now that I look back it seems that to much was invested in Woodson and it kind of contradicts what TT is all about. As for Whale. I really hated seeing him leave. I had no problem with Marco, because of age/ injury's, but Whale was only 28 and was in his prime.

And as for kampman, I have said before that we paid to much for him. He is a team player and a hard worker and I love guys like that, but 5 mil a year is way to much. He has never shown to be worth 5 mil IMO. I would have much rather paid walker and lost kampman. And I am almost certain we would be a hell of a lot better team with Walker instead.

[Fritz]

I'm not sure how anybody can really rip into TT after only two drafts. The vast majority of criticism I've read maintains that we should have signed Mike Wahle. But at the time he was becoming a free agent, most posters on the forums I read, and most articles in the JSO and Press-
Gazette maintained that Wahle would be cost prohibitive and that besides he was not enamoured of Sherman, who was still coach at the time. Finally, when Carolina made the offer it was clear he would be moving to tackle, which is the higher-paid position. The general consensus was that Wahle wasn't affordable and didn't really want to come back anyway.

So now we get this simplistic revisionist history that Ted should have signed Wahle. And it's too soon to say that TT's offensive line picks are busts. As others have noted, for the first two years of Wahle's career - a supplemental pick costing the Pack a second rounder - he was considered a bust. Hell, Rivera didn't play at all the first year.

In his three drafts, whose players are now in their third, fourth, and fifth years (prime years), Mike Sherman contributed one starting lineman - Scott Wells.

I have the same complaint about those b---ing about the Woodson signing. Most people - not all but most - gushed about the signing and said it was about time TT spent some of that cap money. Suddenly after one pre-season game people are jumping TT for the signing. So did you want TT to spend the cap money to replace the player we love to hate (Carroll) or not?

Yes, it's too bad that Favre is going out this way. And it's too bad for Hendu, too. But while TT has made some mistakes, this whole panic mode and let's- fire- Ted thing seems crazy to me.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

While pionting what we think he did wrong, he has done a lot of good things.

kept Green
Signed Pickett
Some how found Gado
Resigned Driver
Didn't sign Marco


Drafted:

Hawk
Jennings
Murphy
Coillins
Hodge
Moll, spitz, colledge (sure over time one well be good)
A-rod



So far his good out weighs he bad. His only bad moves are probably:

Walker
Maybe Woodson, if Woodson shows he not worth 10 mil
Over paid on kampman
Didn't fight hard to keep Whale(maybe it was impossible, none of us really know anyway)

[Astonishment]

Astonishment- see this is where I have a problem with TT's priorities and his understanding of football. I will admit that the Wahle thing sticks in my gut. He was'nt a priority and there was no money for him but there was for Kampman? At this point, who would have had more value to the team?

The cap space could have been worked out with Wahle contrary to what anyone says. This guy was one of the top 3 at his position and TT got NOTHING for him. I dis-agree that he was'nt worth the money. Why did Green have the best short yardage stats a few yrs back? Because running behind Mike was MONEY! Wahle was worth every penny he got, just ask the Panthers RB's.

TT should have backloaded a contract with guarenteed money. The signing bonus could have been structured to fit the cap space by offering him more in the 2nd year. We do have 8 mill sitting here don't we?

I definitely understand what you are saying, and I think there is simply a philosophy difference.

The difference in Wahle not getting signed and Kampman getting signed is timing and position. Could they have fit Wahl in through some funny numbers, yes, but his position should not merit what he wanted and got. I know we disagree on this point, and we do because I believe that those holes were open for Green due to the entirety of the line, not one or two individual players (much like two horses can pull more together than they can by themselves combined). The money that Wahl got would have been very misplaced on a team that was so talent starved. Sticking 8 million a year at the guard position would be being a poor steward as a gm (IMO). That money is needed for all the other positions that this team needs to improve on, and I believe it will be used on more valuable positions than just guard. The offensive line needs to be built on the idea that the sum of the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, and paying Wahl that kind of money on this team is contrary to that philosophy.

Carolina on the other hand was in a position of luxury. They had a talent surplus on their team already and could afford to give a guard that kind of money with out hurting the future.

As for back loading contracts - it always comes back to hurt a team in the long run (San Fran, Washington, Dallas), and this team was already in need of an overhaul. It is like someone who keeps re-financing their home, eventually they will have spent all the money they gained and be in more dept than they previously were...and the housing market drops, at that point they are screwed. IMO that is a very poor philosophy. Personally I go with how the Vikings have financially approached FA. With your cap room you front load your contracts, so you are either on the better side of a players cap hit, or if the player's performance has diminished you’re not locked in.

As for the current cap space I have indirectly addressed that. In short that money is needed to improve the overall talent base, not just one position - especially a position that doesn't demand that kind of money. It will be used in the future for either keeping our young talent or adding a FA who will improve the Packers in positions they otherwise could not improve. The offensive line should improve through the talent they have (now this is where you can question TT). If this talent doesn't reach it's perceived potential TT will than be on the chopping block - because he got the wrong players, but not because he went about it the wrong way!!! You always want to error on the side of getting rid of a player to early rather than to late.

[Astonishment]

Can someone tell me why my quoted portions are showning up the way they are? Thanks in advance.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Does anyone know the exact deal Whale signed and how much he's making this year?

[Astonishment]

His deal was 28.5 million over 5 years, with 11.5 million in first year signing bonus'.

If the Packers kept him his cap hit that year would have been 11 million.

I am going to look to see if I can find a yearly break down.

[TOP HAT]

My top hat is off to the packer rats...excellent discussion in this forum topic about what is really going on and the timeline.

top hat

[MJZiggy]

Wow, I figured something out about computers. (those who know me will be astonished no pun intended)

Astonishment, there is a space after the quote command. If you go right after [quote=packnut] , you will see it there.

[Packnut]

His deal was 28.5 million over 5 years, with 11.5 million in first year signing bonus'.

If the Packers kept him his cap hit that year would have been 11 million.

I am going to look to see if I can find a yearly break down.


Not if they would have back-loaded the 2nd and 3rd year. My point still is we have the money. Re-signing him would not have made a financial difference to this team. Take a look at our roster. Where are we gonna spend the money? It's not like we have any blue chip players who are gonna break the bank. And please don't anyone tell me we need it for FA's next season. TT has made his opinion very clear and IF Woodson bombs out, TT will not make another FA move.

Look, I understand it's in the past and can't be changed. All I'm saying is TT's in-ability to not even attempt to sign Wahle or Walker says a lot about his philosophy. He has to be held accountable for the mistakes he's made.

[Astonishment]

Alright here is the best I can figure with info from kffl
signing bonus - 11.5 two-tiered signing bonus

2005-
base salary $1 million
cap number $2.7 million

2006
base salary $2 million
cap number $3.95 million**

2007
base salary $2 million
cap number $4.29 million**

2008
base salary $3 million
cap number $5.73 million**

2009
base salary $3 million
cap number $6.33 million**

(** - base off of $2.7 million first year cap hit with two tiered signing bonus of assumed $5 million evenly spread, and $6.5 million with 135% annual increase. does not include any additional roster or performance bonuses)

I could only find scattered info, but from most of the roster structures I have seen leaked this is a relatively common structure. I could not find the allowable % of deferment of the signing bonus under the new agreement, so this number may be off as well as how exactly the two tiers of the signing bonus were spread. This is definitely not the actual cap numbers, but it should give an idea to those curious. Based of the reported value of the deal there is still 5.5 million unaccounted for which is probably accounted for in roster or signing bonuses'. I have seen that Wahle’s cap number this year is higher than what I show, but I am unable to find anything indicating what his cap number is this year. He also restructured his deal this year to save some cap for the Panthers. I will keep looking.

[pbmax]

TT should have backloaded a contract with guarenteed money. The signing bonus could have been structured to fit the cap space by offering him more in the 2nd year. We do have 8 mill sitting here don't we?
This is exactly the reverse logic that puts teams in a cap bind. Backloading contracts only works for so long and then you take the hit.

Wahle was on his third contract and wasn't going to take anything other than big money up front. And if I was offering advice, I would agree he shouldn't.

You couldn't have given him a Redskin's special with most of the bonus money really being money he would never see, to keep the cap hit manageable. It would have been a cap eater.

And remember exactly what happened to the teams that signed Wahle, Riveria and Logan Mankins. None went to the Super Bowl. And the Vikings won't with Hutchinson.

Wahle would have made the current team slightly better while eating the cap space that might be used to find truly special players, or a mix of solid veterans making modest salaries.

Is your goal to be 8-8? Or to find the talent to be a Super Bowl contender?

Wahle and Riveria together weren't going to make this team successful in the playoffs.

[Astonishment]

His deal was 28.5 million over 5 years, with 11.5 million in first year signing bonus'.

If the Packers kept him his cap hit that year would have been 11 million.

I am going to look to see if I can find a yearly break down.


Not if they would have back-loaded the 2nd and 3rd year. My point still is we have the money. Re-signing him would not have made a financial difference to this team. Take a look at our roster. Where are we gonna spend the money? It's not like we have any blue chip players who are gonna break the bank. And please don't anyone tell me we need it for FA's next season. TT has made his opinion very clear and IF Woodson bombs out, TT will not make another FA move.

Look, I understand it's in the past and can't be changed. All I'm saying is TT's in-ability to not even attempt to sign Wahle or Walker says a lot about his philosophy. He has to be held accountable for the mistakes he's made.
We will have to agree to disagree on wether or not we should have signed Wahle, but I am in complete agreement with you on Walker.

[Astonishment]

Wow, I figured something out about computers. (those who know me will be astonished no pun intended)

Astonishment, there is a space after the quote command. If you go right after [quote=packnut] , you will see it there.
Iactually added that space in to see if it would fix the problem, but it didn't. So it still showed up that way without the space, but I will edit it back.

[Astonishment]

I was able to find this about wahle's contract:
"Panthers | Wahle's contract restructured
Sat, 11 Mar 2006 05:55:32 -0800

Pat Yasinskas, of the Charlotte Observer, reports the Carolina Panthers have restructured the contract of OG Mike Wahle. His 2006 salary cap number dropped from $7.3 million to $4.7 million."

so now we know Wahles 1st year cap hit was 2.7 million and this years was 7.3 million which would be a difference of 3.35 million from what I had figured, and would account for all of the 28.5 million reported in the contract except fot 2.15 million.

For the record 7.3 is INSAIN money for a guard!!!

[pbmax]

On Wahle's restructure:

The Panthers restructured the contracts for defensive end Julius Peppers, guard Mike Wahle, cornerback Ken Lucas and safety Mike Minter.

By converting base salary into bonus money that will be pro-rated over the life of the contract, the Panthers took Peppers' $14.8 million cap figure to $11.3 million. Minter's dropped from $3.6 million to $2.1 million, Wahle's from $7.3 million to $4.7 million, and Lucas' from $8.78 million to $3.98 million.
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/sports/football/nfl/carolina_panthers/14073050.htm?BlogThisQuoting=bq

[MJZiggy]

Wow, I figured something out about computers. (those who know me will be astonished no pun intended)

Astonishment, there is a space after the quote command. If you go right after [quote=packnut] , you will see it there.
Iactually added that space in to see if it would fix the problem, but it didn't. So it still showed up that way without the space, but I will edit it back.

Sorry, when I quoted your quote and previewed it, it came up right. Now it's beyond me. Are you using the quote button or cutting and pasting? It's somehow done right because I didn't change it when I quoted you quoting me.

[Astonishment]

Wow, I figured something out about computers. (those who know me will be astonished no pun intended)

Astonishment, there is a space after the quote command. If you go right after [quote=packnut] , you will see it there.
Iactually added that space in to see if it would fix the problem, but it didn't. So it still showed up that way without the space, but I will edit it back.

Sorry, when I quoted your quote and previewed it, it came up right. Now it's beyond me. Are you using the quote button or cutting and pasting? It's somehow done right because I didn't change it when I quoted you quoting me.
I'm just using the quote button, but I just changed some of my settings maybe this will work.

<edit> sweet it worked

[Fritz]

"Look, I understand it's in the past and can't be changed. All I'm saying is TT's in-ability to not even attempt to sign Wahle or Walker says a lot about his philosophy. He has to be held accountable for the mistakes he's made."

Packnut, it is possible that TT knew more about Wahle's situation than was let on in public. As I wrote, there were hints that Wahle just flat out wanted to leave, for a couple of reasons. One was Sherman, and two was that he got the chance to play tackle, a higher-pay higher-status position. So we don't know whether it was even possible to sign the guy, no matter what. Remember the Pack outbid Indy for Vinatieri but it didn't matter.

And how do you want to hold TT accountable after two drafts and one season? Fire him? A Gm gets two drafts and one season?

Also, I find it interesting for those folks who wanted the sign-Wahle-no-matter-what-it-costs that Carolina, after only one season, has had to re-structure Wahle's contract. That was one huge contract. Now they'll be taking a cap hit on that contract when Mike Wahle is collecting social security.

[Guiness]

Did Whale end up playing tackle or guard? I thought when all was said and done, he had to play guard due to injuries to other members of the OL.

Carolina's depth chart shows him as the starting left guard, and not even listed as a backup tackle.

[Guiness]

Astonishment - what did you do to fix the quoting? I couldn't see anything wrong with the text of your message.
http://www.katriders.com/forums/images/smiles/hijacked.gif

[Rastak]

Gaurd I think...USA today had an interesting article on gaurds.......
kind of long but I enjoyed it....


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2006-08-30-guards-cover_x.htm


On guard: Talents like Hutchinson, Faneca redefining the position

By Jim Corbett, USA TODAY
MANKATO, Minn. — Steve Hutchinson might as well have been a 6-5, 313-pound ghost.
Seattle Seahawks coach Mike Holmgren walked right past his former left guard as if the Minnesota Vikings' freshly minted, $49 million man didn't exist.

The chilly reception occurred at a mutual friend's wedding this spring.

The thing is, Hutchinson's exit from the Seahawks could have been avoided.

That's the bottom line Holmgren hasn't completely moved on from. Which is how Holmgren came to be one of the few NFL men during the last five years to bull-rush straight past Hutchinson, arguably the game's premier guard along with Pittsburgh Steelers five-time Pro Bowler Alan Faneca. Hutchinson and Faneca were among the dominant reasons why Seattle and Pittsburgh met in Super Bowl XL.

After pouring heart and soul into Holmgren's Seahawks program for five seasons, Hutchinson was caught off-guard by his frosted former coach.

"I put my hand out to shake Mike's hand at the wedding, and he went right by me and didn't even look at me," Hutchinson says at the conclusion of a recent Vikings training camp practice. "He went up to my wife, Landyn, and gave her a hug. He was joking around."

He was and he wasn't. Holmgren was still steamed by everything that shouldn't have transpired before resulting in Hutchinson's departure after five productive years, including three consecutive Pro Bowl seasons. Hutchinson teamed with Seattle's all-world left tackle, Walter Jones, to form arguably the best left side in football and helped pave the way for Shaun Alexander's 27-touchdown, 1,880-yard, league MVP season.

"Steve came out for a wedding for our head equipment guy, Art Kennedy," Holmgren says. "He came up to shake my hand, and I wouldn't talk to him. I went and hugged his wife."

It was a wedding that had the feel of a divorce.

"By the end of the evening, we sat down and talked," Holmgren said. "I wish him the best. It's just too bad he's not with us. I miss him."

Holmgren arrived at the Indianapolis scouting combine in late February convinced Hutchinson would be designated the team's franchise player. Hutchinson says management's lack of serious dialogue combined with the less-appealing transitional designation pushed him away.

"For Mike to say he's still upset about the whole transaction, I am, too, with the way the whole thing was handled," Hutchinson says.

Holmgren was stripped of his general manager duties after the 2004 season and remained as head coach following the ouster of former president of football operations Bob Whitsitt. Hutchinson believes Holmgren's demotion played a factor in his departure.

Hutchinson was certain he would be franchised after watching as Seattle awarded new deals to Jones and quarterback Matt Hasselbeck following the 2004 season, then Alexander this offseason. The tag would have guaranteed a one-year, $6,983,000 deal, the average of the top-five highest-paid offensive linemen last season, and required two first-round picks as compensation from any team that wanted him.

When Seattle instead slapped the $6,391,000 transition tag on him, meaning the Seahawks wouldn't receive compensation if they declined to match an offer, Hutchinson felt it was a slap in the face.

"Seattle bewildered me with the transition tag," Hutchinson says. "I can understand why Mike is upset, and I understand Mike Holmgren isn't the GM there anymore.

"But they transitioned me. And when free agency started, the Vikings just jumped way ahead and showed they wanted me."

Seahawks President Tim Ruskell and vice president of football administration Mike Reinfeldt gambled $592,000, the savings between the transition and franchise tag, that no team would offer to pay nearly $7 million a year on a guard. They gambled wrong.

Aided by a $17 million increase that pushed each team's salary cap to $102.5 million after a March collective bargaining agreement extension, the Vikings designed a shrewd, seven-year $49 million offer sheet laced with a "poison pill." The prohibitive provision stipulated that if Hutchinson, 28, was not the highest-paid offensive lineman at the time he signed the offer sheet, the entire $49 million contract would be guaranteed. In Hutchinson's mind, Seattle had blown its chance.

Seattle contested the clause and even had Jones restructure his deal so Hutchinson averaged more on its books. Still, a league arbitrator ruled for Minnesota. The Seahawks balked at matching the offer, and Hutchinson turned purple. That is, he officially became a Viking, filling Minnesota's glaring left guard pothole.

"Walter Jones and Matt Hasselbeck were both on the front burner after the 2004 season and I had a year left," Hutchinson says. "When it came down to it last February, I was actually driving around looking for property in Seattle, looking for lots to build a house, thinking that if they don't get a deal done, I'm at least getting franchised and going to be there for another six, seven years when they hammer out a long-term deal."

Could Hutchinson's exit be the first fissure in a Seattle Super Bowl hangover? Holmgren, Hasselbeck and others think they're well-stocked at the position. But the season will tell the tale.

"It's a sore subject on both sides," Hutchinson says. "I'm upset because I left a brotherhood, some guys and coaches I spent five years with.

"I still think Mike's chapped about it and hasn't moved on. And I'm upset like that, too. There's some personnel decisions made there I didn't agree with.

"Did it work out for me and my family? Absolutely."

Until Hutchinson elevated one of pro football's Rodney Dangerfield positions to left tackle financial portfolio, only one guard, ex-Dallas Cowboy and current San Francisco 49er Larry Allen, made more than $6 million a season.

"It just shows you don't have to be one of these guys to get paid," Faneca says, pointing as left tackle Marvel Smith walks by at the team's St. Vincent College training camp in Latrobe, Pa.

There are seven modern-era guards in the Pro Football Hall of Fame, including NFL Players Association executive director and former Oakland Raider Gene Upshaw, former Houston Oiler Mike Munchak, for Miami Dolphin Larry Little and New England Patriots great John Hannah. Guards have received glory before but have rarely been shown the money.

"I mean, my man hit it at the right time, huh?" Faneca says of Hutchinson's $49 million payday in sync with a $17 million-per-team salary-cap increase. "He was just off his first deal and right into the new labor deal. His timing was awesome."

Hutchinson and Faneca were bullish catalysts for last year's third- and fifth-ranked run games, respectively. Hutchinson and Faneca play the game alike. In addition to being supersized athletes, they bring that every-down tenacity and are known for playing with a nasty streak. Hutchinson is a better drive blocker. Faneca might be more renowned for his pulling agility. Both are punishing finishers who play with a defensive player's aggressiveness. Only one player got more all-pro votes at the position last season than Faneca. That was Hutchinson, who led all guards with 40 votes. Faneca and the Kansas City Chiefs' Brian Waters each received 18 votes.

Faneca received one vote for Super Bowl MVP for his crushing block on Seattle linebacker LeRoy Hill that sprung Willie Parker on his Super Bowl-record 75-yard touchdown. The second play of the second half, called "Counter 34 Pike," gave the Steelers a 14-3 lead. They never looked back en route to a 21-10 win at Detroit's Ford Field.

"History? Oh, it made me chuckle at first," Faneca says of that MVP vote. "It's nice. I always said it was probably some offensive lineman that gave me the vote."

Quite an honor for a position that was devalued only three years ago when the Green Bay Packers under then-coach Mike Sherman opted to let both veteran starting guards, Mike Wahle and Marco Rivera, sign with other teams (the Carolina Panthers and Cowboys) in free agency. The Packers operated on the long-held premise that you don't pay guards, you draft and coach up younger ones. Green Bay's 4-12 free fall last season seemed to contradict that Buckingham Palace rotational approach to guards.

"Just offensive line play in general, a lot of people get overlooked," Faneca says. "We don't touch the ball. We're not in that glamour position. A casual fan is not a fan of offensive-line play. A more serious fan of football can appreciate what we do and the importance of us doing our job, so that all the glamour positions can do what they do."

The Steelers no longer have "The Bus," Jerome Bettis, their beloved, bruising running back now working as an NBC studio analyst. But they still have their 6-5, 307-pound, red-haired "Road Grader." Faneca is the fiery face of the Steelers' bedrock counter play.

Pittsburgh's 1998 first-round pick from LSU plays guard with linebacker fire. There's good reason: He started out in the game as a linebacker.

What few Steelers fans know is that Faneca has taken seizure medication since 15. He has become a symbol of possibility for 2.7 million Americans with epilepsy and works with the Epilepsy Foundation to raise awareness about the often-stigmatized condition.

"Alan is the Jerome Bettis of our line of scrimmage," Super Bowl XL MVP Hines Ward says. "He just leads by example. He's a great model for younger guys. You want to be a true all-pro because of the way Alan plays."

As much as they have done to protect quarterbacks Ben Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck, Faneca and Hutchinson share the vision of the runners who draft in their slipstreams, waiting for them to bulldoze cutback lanes.

"Guard is really the position that defines your run game, and having a dominant run game goes hand in hand with having strong guards," Ward says. "Shaun Alexander wouldn't have had the year he had without Steve Hutchinson, and Willie Parker wouldn't have helped us win a Super Bowl without Alan Faneca kicking out like he does, blasting people off the ball.

"Hutchinson and Faneca don't get a lot of credit at that position.

"But we all know how important Faneca is to our team."

When they need the hard yards or the weather turns cold and windy, the Steelers rely more heavily on their rangy guard to plow through overaggressive defenses.

"In our offense, we require our guards to be mobile and move," Faneca says. "The counter game is big on our part. The screen plays. The way we like offensive linemen, you can be big but you still have to move.

"A lot of teams don't place the value on guards as much. They maybe find a guy, a big guy clogging up the middle, and that guy's not necessarily going to keep it up out there against a fast defensive end."

Steelers defensive coordinator Dick LeBeau changed his scheme in the second half of the Super Bowl win because Hutchinson was engulfing safety Troy Polamalu's all-out blitzes.

LeBeau adjusted by dropping Polamalu in the second half, sending free safety Chris Hope instead.

"Unless you're watching film, if you're the average fan, it's hard to see a guard in the game," Hutchinson says. "You can see tackles because they're out on the edge. But the way the game is evolving now, you've got defensive tackles who are starting to be just as athletic as ends. You've got guys that are 315 pounds that can run 4.5, 4.6 who are unbelievable agilitywise. And in a lot of blocking schemes, you're one-on-one with these guys.

"The Steelers were sending guys from everywhere against us in the Super Bowl. Defenses have changed, even since I've been in the league the last five years."

In what way?

"There's a lot more disguising, a lot more blitzing from safeties and corners," he says. "Depending on your blocking schemes, sometimes you have to pop out and take a corner coming off the edge in space, and that's hard. I'm 315 pounds, and you're going against a guy who's 190 who does a cone drill in about half a second.

"The extent of a guard's role maybe 10-15 years ago, the hardest thing he had to do was pull around the tackle and block a linebacker 5 yards downfield. Now we're going 20-30 yards downfield on a screen pass, blocking a corner."

In the early 1990s, the Steelers were the lone 3-4 defensive team.

Now at least eight teams play a 3-4 as their base scheme.

"A lot more teams play 3-4 now," Faneca says. "When I came in, it was starting to get phased out. I think for a year or two, we were the only ones doing it.

"You see a lot of guys like (the Cleveland Browns') Ted Washington, big guys that are big in the middle and command more than one person. That's kind of how the inside game has gone. You see those guys have a lot of value to teams and to defenses, to help eat up guards and centers. But the inside game, I see the combination blocks and forcing the hand of maybe losing a guard. Keeping the linebackers free has been a big concern."

Former San Francisco 49ers guard/center and Sirius Radio NFL analyst Randy Cross was a multitasking, agile blocker ahead of his time.

"I would refer to it as a dark period there from a guard technique and style standpoint," Cross says. "It was all about girth and size there for a while. Now it's a lot more about movement and motion.

"Now we actually talk about linemen functioning in space. That's one of the reasons for the proliferation of the zone-style blocking and for Kansas City's line that has been predicated on all five guys being able to get out and move. That has led this charge to valuing the offensive guard again. Guards didn't used to be as agile.

"Two other guys I look at are Kansas City's Will Shields and Brian Waters. They're maybe not as physically imposing because Hutch and Alan are freakish-sized guys. But all these guys can block you in space, on the move or inside a phone booth."

At Kansas City's River Falls, Wis., camp, Shields, a 14-year veteran who has gone to 11 consecutive Pro Bowls, has helped spring Priest Holmes and Larry Johnson to five consecutive top-five rushing seasons. Even after all those Pro Bowls, Shields isn't too proud to concede he borrows from his guard brothers, Hutchinson and Faneca.

"You sit back and watch them both," Shields says. "I try to add different things they do to my toolbox.

"You watch and see how they do different things. And a couple of days in practice, you go out and try it and see if it works for you. If you're not always working on your game and watching the other guys at your position and see what they've found out from different people, you're not going to get any better."

Right back at you, big guy.

"Just as much as I admire how well Will plays, I admire how long he's done it," Faneca says. "Being able to play with him for five years in the Pro Bowl, I think highly of him."

It helped in Hutchinson's development that his first three years dovetailed with seven-time Pro Bowl defensive tackle John Randle's final three years of a 15-year career played out in Seattle.

"On training camp mornings like this, I'd wake up and the first thing that would pop in my head was, 'I've got to go against John Randle today!' " Hutchinson says. "But it paid off because I know without a doubt I wouldn't be where I am today if I didn't have the opportunity to go against him.

"You practice against John, a certain Hall of Famer, all week, and you get in the game and it seemed like slow motion."

Now Hutch and Randle are next-door, Twin Cities neighbors.

"Steve is going to do everything possible to show he's worth the money," Randle says.

"I tried to help Steve get better the way (former guard) Randall McDaniel helped me when I was with the Vikings.

"Hutch has got great technique and feet.

"Some of the younger Seahawks defensive linemen would ask me, 'What moves should I use on him?' I said, 'You better make sure it's your best move because he's going to knock you 5-10 yards off the ball.' "

Hutchinson lives in Key Largo, Fla., and is an avid fisherman.

Randle learned how avid this summer when Hutchinson asked him if he wanted to go walleye fishing at a northern Minnesota lake.

"I thought we were going to fish from 6 a.m. to 4 in the afternoon," Randle says. "Steve says, "No, we're going to fish from 4:45 in the morning to midnight. We did that for three days, catching our limit.

"Hutch was talking about movies, telling marlin fishing stories down in Florida. We had a blast."

Four-time Pro Bowl Vikings center Matt Birk and Hutchinson already have a strong foundation after they hit it off spending all those Februarys together in Hawaii.

"People always ask me, 'What about this Hutchinson guy? All the money he got?' I tell them, 'If there's one guy who's worth it, it's Steve,' " Birk says. "He is that special player.

"He comes to work to get better and to get the guys around him better, working our combo blocks to make sure we're all on the same page."

Said Holmgren at the Super Bowl:

"He is a different type of lineman. He's as hardworking a lineman as I've ever seen, and he's tremendously strong and very bright ... fabulous ability."

That's why Holmgren has yet to completely move on from losing a left guard that Minnesota prized like a left tackle.

Holmgren knows the deal. The last five Super Bowl losers have failed to make the playoffs the following year. Is the unnecessary breakup of Seattle's prolific left side of Jones and Hutchinson an early omen there could be a sixth? Alexander is the only player in league history to have scored 15 or more touchdowns in five consecutive seasons, all during Hutchinson's tenure.

"Common sense tells you that it's going to be hard replacing Hutch in Seattle, the same if you took away Alan Faneca from Pittsburgh," Cross says. "There's a lot of stuff the Seahawks are going to have to adjust to. Walter Jones will have to adjust, (center) Robbie Tobeck will have to adjust. Shaun Alexander will have to adjust. I think Hutch's loss will hurt them in the short term."

The long term?

We'll have a better idea how bitter an aftertaste a poison pill can leave Oct. 22. That's when Hutchinson's Vikings meet Holmgren's Seahawks.

Contributing: USA TODAY's Chris Colston, Jarrett Bell and Nate Davis

[MJZiggy]

Let me make sure I have the info correct on this:
TT was hired in November of 2004.
Wahle was released from his contract March 2005 or 4 months later.
Wahle reportedly wanted to test FA
Wahle reportedly did not care for Sherman
Wahle reportedly wanted the opportunity to play tackle
One reason this is all TT's fault is that he should have been resigned and upgraded by midseason
Another reason this is all TT's fault is that he couldn't pay the bonus and cut Wahle.
TT has said that not trying SOMETHING more to keep Wahle or Rivera was a mistake.

Are these correct? If so I'd really like to know how TT was supposed to have redone the deal by midseason when he wasn't hired til after that. How were we to pay him if #1 he didn't want to be here, #2 he wanted insane money and #3 he wanted to play a position that we weren't offering him? Why didn't Sherman have his contract redone in October? Could it be that they tried and he refused to redo it? TT didn't get it done, neither did Sherman and they all knew that bonus was coming. How many times do we hang a guy for something he's already admitted was a mistake? It's long over. It's done. There's nothing that can be done about it now and last I heard from the guinea pig standing behind them, the experiment is working and the new guards are playing well (and, frankly that guinea pig gets a little pissed when people outside the organization suggest that they know what's going on inside).

[Guiness]

Anyone know if the NFL is moving towards doing something about the ridiculous poison pills in Hutchison and Burleson's contracts?

There was a lot of gripping about them at the time - I wonder if it was just hot air, or if a change will be made.

[Astonishment]

Astonishment - what did you do to fix the quoting? I couldn't see anything wrong with the text of your message.
http://www.katriders.com/forums/images/smiles/hijacked.gif
In my profile I had -

Always attach my signature:
Always allow BBCode:
Always allow HTML:

all marked as "no", I went in and changed all of them to yes and it worked (if I am correct it should be the BBCode that fixed it, but someone with more computer knowledge should be able to answer that).

[Packnut]

Let me make sure I have the info correct on this:
TT was hired in November of 2004.
Wahle was released from his contract March 2005 or 4 months later.
Wahle reportedly wanted to test FA
Wahle reportedly did not care for Sherman
Wahle reportedly wanted the opportunity to play tackle
One reason this is all TT's fault is that he should have been resigned and upgraded by midseason
Another reason this is all TT's fault is that he couldn't pay the bonus and cut Wahle.
TT has said that not trying SOMETHING more to keep Wahle or Rivera was a mistake.

Are these correct? If so I'd really like to know how TT was supposed to have redone the deal by midseason when he wasn't hired til after that. How were we to pay him if #1 he didn't want to be here, #2 he wanted insane money and #3 he wanted to play a position that we weren't offering him? Why didn't Sherman have his contract redone in October? Could it be that they tried and he refused to redo it? TT didn't get it done, neither did Sherman and they all knew that bonus was coming. How many times do we hang a guy for something he's already admitted was a mistake? It's long over. It's done. There's nothing that can be done about it now and last I heard from the guinea pig standing behind them, the experiment is working and the new guards are playing well (and, frankly that guinea pig gets a little pissed when people outside the organization suggest that they know what's going on inside).


New guards are playing well? We must be watching different games cause our guards don't have a clue what to do when they reach the 2nd level of defenders which is one reason we have had no run game.

[Rastak]

Anyone know if the NFL is moving towards doing something about the ridiculous poison pills in Hutchison and Burleson's contracts?

There was a lot of gripping about them at the time - I wonder if it was just hot air, or if a change will be made.


I think they'll outlaw them, otherwise the transition tag is totally worthless.

Teams best defense against this is to Franchise the players you need to or get a deal done BEFORE they hit free agency.

[Astonishment]

Rastak,

That is an interesting article, but I don't think anyone is arguing how improtant guards are, but rather where they should fit on the pay scale for the Packers. IMO I think Hutchinson was agreat signing for you, and I wanted the Packers to go after him. That said I find it odd that Hutchinson helped Walter Jones, Robbie Tobeck, and Alexander but there is never any thought about how much they helped him. Hutchinson is undoubtable a great player, but an offensive line is always more than one or two players. Thier job is done as a unit and judged as a unit. As great as Hutchinson is I still would take a group of good players who worked well together over a bunch of great players thrown together.

Again I am not downing the Vikings for signing him, because I would like to have some great players in that o-line that works well together, but I am still not convinced that one player ever makes or breaks an o-line - it is the line as a whole.

[Rastak]

Rastak,

That is an interesting article, but I don't think anyone is arguing how improtant guards are, but rather where they should fit on the pay scale for the Packers. IMO I think Hutchinson was agreat signing for you, and I wanted the Packers to go after him. That said I find it odd that Hutchinson helped Walter Jones, Robbie Tobeck, and Alexander but there is never any thought about how much they helped him. Hutchinson is undoubtable a great player, but an offensive line is always more than one or two players. Thier job is done as a unit and judged as a unit. As great as Hutchinson is I still would take a group of good players who worked well together over a bunch of great players thrown together.

Again I am not downing the Vikings for signing him, because I would like to have some great players in that o-line that works well together, but I am still not convinced that one player ever makes or breaks an o-line - it is the line as a whole.


Understood and I agree. Right now they aren't looking all that special but I think they'll be good as they gel. McKinney had a good year last year and Birk is a pretty good center so they'll be fine. We'll find out soon enough if he's worth the cash.

[MJZiggy]

Let me make sure I have the info correct on this:
TT was hired in November of 2004.
Wahle was released from his contract March 2005 or 4 months later.
Wahle reportedly wanted to test FA
Wahle reportedly did not care for Sherman
Wahle reportedly wanted the opportunity to play tackle
One reason this is all TT's fault is that he should have been resigned and upgraded by midseason
Another reason this is all TT's fault is that he couldn't pay the bonus and cut Wahle.
TT has said that not trying SOMETHING more to keep Wahle or Rivera was a mistake.

Are these correct? If so I'd really like to know how TT was supposed to have redone the deal by midseason when he wasn't hired til after that. How were we to pay him if #1 he didn't want to be here, #2 he wanted insane money and #3 he wanted to play a position that we weren't offering him? Why didn't Sherman have his contract redone in October? Could it be that they tried and he refused to redo it? TT didn't get it done, neither did Sherman and they all knew that bonus was coming. How many times do we hang a guy for something he's already admitted was a mistake? It's long over. It's done. There's nothing that can be done about it now and last I heard from the guinea pig standing behind them, the experiment is working and the new guards are playing well (and, frankly that guinea pig gets a little pissed when people outside the organization suggest that they know what's going on inside).


New guards are playing well? We must be watching different games cause our guards don't have a clue what to do when they reach the 2nd level of defenders which is one reason we have had no run game.

I was referring to protecting the qb which is what the qb said they did well. His opinion is more important than mine.

[Tony Oday]

MAtt Birk he went to Harvard

[TOP HAT]

Packers' offensive line set but not sturdy Growing pains still plague rookies By BOB McGINN Journalsentinel.com Posted: Aug. 31, 2006


Green Bay - The Green Bay Packers' offensive line probably ranks as one of the weakest in the National Football League but at least the club has identified its five starters and No. 2 left tackle entering the regular season.

Left guard Jason Spitz and right guard Tony Moll have been up and down all summer but barring a late trade, the Packers have little alternative other than to start both rookies Sept. 10 against the Chicago Bears.

"Hopefully," offensive coordinator Jeff Jagodzinski said at mid-week, "we can stay that way for many years."

Another rookie, Daryn Colledge, was drafted in the second round and installed immediately as the starter at left guard. That lasted until Aug. 14 when Colledge lost his lineup berth to Moll.

For a few days after his demotion, Colledge continued to back up Spitz. Josh Bourke, a rookie free agent, was behind Chad Clifton at left tackle.

However, when Bourke suffered a strained calf late in the Atlanta game and then aggravated it in practice two days later, the Packers needed someone to play behind Clifton. With Bourke out indefinitely, Colledge played 1½ quarters at left tackle Monday night and looked better than he ever did at guard.

"He did some nice things," offensive line coach Joe Philbin said. "He was solid. He took a step forward, no question about it."

Left tackle is where Colledge played his entire career at Boise State. Two scouts said he appeared much better suited to play left tackle, which is more of a finesse position against lighter opponents, than to play guard, where bulk size and strength is more necessary.

"He did a better job in pass pro at left tackle than guard," one personnel man said. "He didn't get bounced and buckled."

Colledge, who weighs 301 pounds, also came off the ball and sustained well as a run blocker against the backups from Cincinnati.

For now, Colledge is the top left-side backup behind Clifton and Spitz. He probably would find his way into the lineup one way or another if Moll or right tackle Mark Tauscher were injured.

Junius Coston, the No. 2 right tackle, is a converted guard and needs a ton of work if he makes the team. It also remains to be seen if the Packers deem veteran guard Tupe Peko worth keeping. With decent depth in such short supply, it's possible that general manager Ted Thompson will pick up one if not two more offensive linemen by opening day.

"He looked more natural out there," Jagodzinski said, referring to Colledge's play at left tackle. "Now we can create a left-side backup. For now. He's going to be a good player, he really is. It's just going to take some time."

In his second start, Moll probably played adequately. According to one scout, he was effective at times run-blocking at the point of attack and looked good picking up a linebacker on a blitz.

Moll, however, did have a glaring negative. On stretch plays away from him, he did a poor job two or three times getting in position on cut blocks designed to prevent his man from chasing down the runner from behind. Moll kept flopping at the nearest leg of the defensive tackle when his aiming point should have been the man's farthest leg.

"Really, from where he starts to where he ends up cutting the guy is about a 5-yard deal," Jagodzinski said. "That's why you've got to have guys that can move. We practice that every day because it's such a big part of what we do."

Moll should be fast enough to get in better position. What Philbin wants him to do is take another step or two before cutting.

"You've got to take the back half of your body and get it on his play-side half right above his knee," Philbin said. "That's all you've got to do. I don't know if there are any easy blocks but it's a doable block. Certainly it's not like asking them to take a 350-pound Sam Adams and take him seven yards that way."

Spitz had two bad plays. On a third and 1, he played too high and was pushed deep into the backfield by defensive tackle John Thornton on a carry for no gain. Later, when the Bengals rushed only three players, Spitz was in poor position on a twist and the subsequent knockdown of Brett Favre by defensive lineman Bryan Robinson led to an interception.

"They had a three-man rush and you're scratching your head why the hell they got a pressure," Philbin said. "But other than the twist I thought he pass-blocked pretty well. For his third game, this kid has awareness.

"Sometimes he's locked up (with) guys and he's still looking for twists. And he blocked the three-technique pretty well when we ran the ball his way. His put his nose where it had to be."

The first real test for the rookies is forthcoming nine days from now at Lambeau Field.

[TOP HAT]

By packiowa Undrafted Rat in another thread relevant to OL rebuilding analysis:


I know there have been other threads on this topic, but I don't wanna search for it. I spent last night watching each play at least 10 times on Tivo. Here are my impressions.


The guards and wells played better than the tackles. Granted, Moll got pushed around a couple of times by Adams, but he was fairly solid. Wells and Spitz got killed on a double team in pass blocking, but Clifton got pushed back towards Favre a little quicker and forced Favre to throw before the big hit (it was the int).

Wells was okay, but not spectacular. A lot of times he got into space and couldn't find a block. Same with Spitz in space, he couldn't find a lb to block most of the time.

Colledge looked solid at LT.
White didn't do anything at all.
Coston seemed to hold up pretty well and can get into space quickly.

On defense,

Pickett is a starter and played alright.
Williams played a solid game and gets a pretty good push.
Cole got decent push, but did get blown off the ball once abut 5-7 yards.
Allen is the same as Cole, with one terrible play.
Jenkins can rush the passer, but should NEVER play on anything other than a passing down. He gets completely driven off the line. It was really bad.
Jolly played alright, but didn't flash.

Hawk played too much like Barnett. Running down the line and jumping on.
Hodge is the only lb that tries to blow up a hole. He did look really, realy slow running with Hawkins as they tried to catch Mcneal for his td.
Popinga sticks his nose in the hole pretty well but doesn't knife in to make a hit like Hodge. Even so, it's better than Barnett's style imo.

Monday night, I was angry at OL, DL, and Woodson/Hawkins. After re-watching the game to the extreme, I came away with these impressions.

OL--> okay except for the vets, which gives me some hope. I question whether our guards can be effective on runs once they get in space though.

DT--> Played alright. Nobody took up two blockers with any sort of consistency. As good as Jenkins looked against the pass, he was even worse against the run. I'd got with Pickett and Williams as starters based solely off that game.

DE--> NO pash rush. We gotta keep Kamp, KGB, and probably MM in case of injury. Other than that Hunter can play some S.T. so he may be worth keeping. KGB played the run alright against Cinn.

The main difference in our running game and the Bengals was that their guards were consistently getting to the second level and making blocks. We rarely (i'm not kidding either) got any kind of meaningful block on the backers in space. If the tackles can turn it up and the guards and wells can be more effective in space, this offense can work.

As for the defense, I was miffed. The DT's are workable and I thought they got a much better push than the Bengals (excluding 2-3 Adams plays where he threw around Moll to no advantage). The DE's played the run alright, but were not getting nearly enough pressure. Not even close. We did learn than Monty can overpower te's fairly well.

I was hoping (I have been watching Greenway and Hawk at Iowa for a while) that our LB's would start showing some explosion, but I didn't see it. Hodge still tries to blow things up, but he not as effective yet was he was at Iowa. Poppy sticks his nose in better. Hawk seems a little unsure of attacking the los, but i hope that changes.

Okay, done rambling. It's slightly encouraging that the vets (tackles and woody and Kamp for being too quiet) played the worst.

These are my final thoughts. This team is only a consistent pass rush away from contending for the playoffs in a weak division. If Carroll is covering well and Hawkins or Horton prove worthy of the nickel, does Woddy begrudgingly move to safety part time. Probably not until late season or next year, but that may be our best nickel package.

Edit: Forgot one. Leach was not that good at run blocking. Sure he can block, but for some reason the rb's and Leach were not on the same page. I wonder if he has the instincts to block in this scheme. Hopeully, Hendo will make a difference.

[TOP HAT]

[
Article Last Updated: 08/31/2006 WR Walker glad he's an ex-Packer After watching Cincinnati trounce Green Bay, Denver's new acquisition says he's happier in Denver. By Bill Williamson Denver Post Staff Writer


..."It just made me happy to know I'm here and not dealing with that anymore," Walker said. "This is a winning organization, and I'm better off here."

[ahaha]

I am confused as to why Hutchinson can claim he felt betrayed. He was mad that they didn't franchise him? Most players seem pissed when that happens to them. From what I read, Hutch was designated a transition FA out of good faith. It gave him the opportunity to go out and find his market value. Then the Seahawks could match that offer, if they wanted to. But, his agent put the "poison pill" in the contract, making it virtually impossible for the Seahawks to match. They obviously wanted to match the contract, because they fought the "poison pill" clause in court up until the deadline to match. The Seahawks were generous in giving Hutch a chance to see what he was worth to the rest of the NFL. If anyone betrayed the other, it was Hutchinson.

[Chubbyhubby]

I am too am getting frustrated with the Pack. Its not just the team is rebuilding, its also the coaching staff is extremely young. They too wil have growing pains as well. Like it or not, The packers of the late 90's are no more. Sherman screwed us over big time.

This is ssimilar to the Milwaukee Bucks. The Bucks have a head (I stil act like an assistant) coach in Terry Stotts. He is still learning on the job and last years team had great games and then looked like crap the next game. They are to a young team. Just like the Packers.

Its going to be tough few years. No question, As packer fans we al survied the Forrest Gregg and Lindey Infante years so lets give MM a chance and see how he responds.

For that matter give TT a chance as well. He is no Ron Wolf he is Ted Thompson.

As I tell my 9 year old son "Just be yourself and do the best you can thats all you can do"

Thats good advice, Ted Thompson is going to be Ted Thompson and thats the bottom line. He has to be what he is.

[TOP HAT]

While the commentaries by packer fans are great about rebuilding and key personnel needs on ol and dl, I see what writers noticed continuing at two major weaknesses: no consistent pass rushing on a soft defense especially on key downs and no serious elite replacements for Wahle and Rivera.

I can wait until after the first 2 games at home to make a serious assessment of the strategic planning by management to win while rebuilding.

[TOP HAT]

Brad Zimanek column: Another gory year on horizon before Packers can turn the corner By Brad Zimanek

Ready for another season revisiting Green Bay's gory years of the '70s and '80s? This season certainly won't remind Packers fans of the '60s or '90s.


Next weekend's 10th anniversary celebration of the Super Bowl XXXI champions at Lambeau Field will be the closest this year's team gets to greatness. The last time the Packers began a season with such under whelming expectations must date back to 1987 or 1988. It shows how fast an NFL team can plummet because of injuries, poor draft choices/free agent decisions and disappointing leadership.


The Packers actually headed into the 2005 season eyeing a fourth-straight NFC North Division title and it soon fell apart with losses in seven of the first eight games.


There were plenty of question marks heading into last year, but even the most cynical green and gold followers wouldn't have considered it too big of a stretch, especially in this parity-driven league, for the Packers to at least be in contention for a playoff spot.


Now, with Green Bay welcoming the Bears in the season opener Sept. 10, the word playoffs rolls off your tongue in classic Jim Mora-like refrain: "Playoffs?!"


That's how farfetched and unrealistic the postseason appears at this point.


The Packers completed their less-than-inspiring preseason Friday afternoon with a 35-21 loss to Tennessee at Lambeau Field that included basically one highlight – rookie wide receiver Greg Jenning's 89-yard reception that set up a 7-0 lead.


Obviously exhibition records don't mean anything or Pittsburgh fans would be grilling coach Bill Cowher for the Super Bowl champion Steelers 0-4 performance.


But there's wisdom to be gained from Green Bay's 1-3 record that included last an embarrassing 48-17 loss to Cincinnati on Monday before a national TV audience.


The Packers will be at a disadvantage on both the offensive and defensive lines against nearly every team they play this season.


Think about that. Let it sink in.


Being physical up front is synonymous with the definition of football.


It means you could see a lot in the regular season of what you've seen in the preseason.


Running the ball will be a struggle. That sets up long-yardage situations trying to convert first downs. That puts Brett Favre under the gun to make a play. That leads to some great moments, but can also lead to turnovers or, at the least, plenty of three-and-outs.


"You can't win, if you can't run the ball," Favre said.


That puts pressure on the defense to get off the field.


But it's much harder to get off the field when the opposition can run the ball and is faced with third-and-short conversion situations. That leads to the defense taking chances on making great plays, but that also can backfire into backbreaking touchdowns.


None of the above is recipe for success in the NFL.


Coach Mike McCarthy said his biggest concerns heading into his first season were consistency running the ball, allowing third-down conversions and special teams.


If that weren't enough, McCarthy must deal with things like the stupidity of rookie defensive tackle Johnny Jolly getting a taunting penalty after making a tackle out of bounds (that drew boos from the crowd) and getting acclimated to head coaching duties.


Like when to challenge, considering McCarthy was unsuccessful challenging a run after Aaron Rodgers' dive for the first down marker at Green Bay's own 36-yard line.


There is some intrigue heading into the season.


Jennings could be special. Think what would happen if the special teams could cover some of Jon Ryan's booming punts? The linebacking unit and secondary could be more talented and deeper this year than it has been in the last three or four years.


But a realist sees similarities to the 4-12 team, problems on both lines and a first-year coach getting his feet wet. So it's no wonder expectations are lower than this franchise has faced in decades. Packer fans can only hope it doesn't take too long to go back up.

[MJZiggy]

This is why Favre had to be talked into giving interviews.

[Fritz]

MJZigs...

Thanks for clarifying about the Wahle situation. I get ticked off too when people just start laying blanket blame without studying what actually happened.

As for Hutchinson, that sounds like a few people screwed up. I get miffed when somebody like him acts like he's been jerked around somehow. If he really wanted to play for Seattle, he could have, and he could have been making a boat load of money doing it. Don't cry, Stevie.

[TOP HAT]

Rebuilding Packers will require patience
Written by Mike Vandermause - Green Bay Press-Gazette

Green Bay - No one in the Packers' organization wants to use the "rebuilding" word. No one wants to say the 2006 team is a year or two away from being a legitimate contender.


No one wants to admit wins will be few and far between.


But that's what faces the Packers this season. With almost half the roster made up of players possessing a year of NFL experience or less, the Packers are destined to suffer some significant growing pains.

Don't be fooled by the presence of veteran quarterback Brett Favre, who in years past was capable of elevating an ordinary team to the playoffs.


Favre still has skills, but not even he can single-handedly turn this team into a contender.


Some will blame Packers General Manager Ted Thompson for the predicament. But Thompson inherited not only a team on the decline, but one that was strapped by the salary cap.


There is no way of knowing whether Thompson will turn around this listing ship. But one thing is certain: His possessive attitude toward draft picks gives the Packers the best chance for success.


It's not a short-term cure. Rebuilding takes time and patience. It also takes keen judgment, which is the skill on which Thompson will be judged.


A team can accumulate a truckload of draft picks, but if those players do nothing more than blow bubbles in the huddle, losing is sure to follow.


Ten of Thompson's draft picks in 2006 made the roster, and four will be in the starting lineup against the Chicago Bears on Sunday. That could be a credit to Thompson's drafting prowess or an indication of a roster lacking in talent.


It should be noted that just five of Thompson's 11 draft picks in 2005 are on the roster, and only one of the five — safety Nick Collins — has started.


Thompson has dipped into free agency with mixed results. He failed in attempts to replenish the offensive line last season with Adrian Klemm and Matt O'Dwyer, but that didn't stop him from trying to bolster the defense this year with cornerback Charles Woodson, safety Marquand Manuel and nose tackle Ryan Pickett.


Maybe the defense will shine with an improved linebacking corps and seemingly solid secondary. But if the Packers can't generate a pass rush or stop the run, they will be in trouble.


On offense, a line featuring two rookie guards will be hard-pressed to protect Favre and open holes for running back Ahman Green, who is returning from a major injury.


On paper, this is a team that will scratch and claw for everything it gets. New coach Mike McCarthy can try every motivational ploy in the book, but there's only so much he can do with the available manpower.


A playoff berth or winning record this year would be a shocking accomplishment.


Fans hoping to avoid frustration should lower their expectations and be content with a team that plays smart, gives its all and shows improvement.


No one in the Packers' organization wants to say it publicly, but that's the best you can hope for in the midst of a major rebuilding project.

[TOP HAT]

Deputy Nutz summary after 1st game: "This was not the way Ted Thompson and his lacky Mike McCarthy wanted to start the season, but with poor or at least questionable off season moves, or failure to make moves that would seem sensible for team that was 36 million under the cap at one point, this loss should have been expected. Ted Thompson has looked out classed and over his head as the Packers General Manager in the last two seasons. His 2005 draft has already been considered a failure. His lack of concern over the offensive line is mind boggling, especially when you have a QB like Brett Favre that needs protection. His hire of Mike McCarthy now has to come into question. After the first game of the 2006 season, and 4 preseason games, it seems that McCarthy might not be ready to be a head coach in the NFL. He was outclassed by Lovie Smith, and his game plan was basic and uninspiring. His hire of Bob Sanders can also be considered a reach. The special teams is down right unwatchable and fails to ignite this team in anyway. The bottom line is that Thompson has taken this franchise in the wrong direction over the last year and a half."


Finally, the player personnel had it generally correct about what a mess too in a posted article on the views of two personnel directors, one from an NFC team and the other from an AFC team: "It's a mess. I have no idea why Ted (Thompson) would entertain hiring that guy (Mike McCarthy) as a head coach." . . . "The little bit I've seen on TV of them, wow. No. 21 (Charles Woodson). Whew?" . . . "I still think Ahman Green can do something. But sometimes when you get behind in games, your running back, as good as he is, can't really run." . . . "Brett Favre is done. He's going to lose games for you, not win them. He's two years late retiring. The bad thing is, he holds you back from developing your team." . . . "I think Aaron Rodgers has a chance. The other guy can't do the things he used to do physically himself and he doesn't have the supporting cast to help him do it. He's a gunslinger. Gunslingers become erratic at some point and aren't worth anything." . . . "How good is Ahman Green going to be? How much speed and quickness has he lost? It's an unknown. He doesn't have a backup." . . . "I like (Greg) Jennings. I don't like the other two, including (Donald) Driver, no matter what he's done. I think Jennings has a chance to be something special. I've never liked any of their tight ends." . . . "I don't know how they're going to win with those two rookie guys at guard. I don't like Scott Wells. (Mark) Tauscher is as good as any right tackle in the league probably. (Chad) Clifton has bad knees. Those backups will get a lot of snaps because they're going to get the (expletive) kicked out of them on the inside. Imagine that offensive line lining up against Chicago. Or Minnesota. Mercy, mercy, mercy." . . . "I know Bob Sanders. I think he's a solid guy. They won't make a lot of mental mistakes but I don't think they're good enough." . . . "Everybody likes their two defensive ends better than I do. They can both rush the passer. (Ryan) Pickett is the real deal inside. The rest are just guys. It's not even close between Pickett and Grady Jackson." . . . "(Nick) Barnett is a good player. (A.J.) Hawk will be a great player. It all depends if (Brady) Poppinga has the instincts for the position. He certainly has the talent." . . . "Is Methuselah still with them at cornerback? They're old. And Ahmad Carroll is just not an instinctive player. He doesn't have any ball sense. I think Woodson will get beat consistently. (Al) Harris doesn't have enough speed. He plays everything in front of him very well. He's a pure Cover 2 corner right now." . . . "It's amazing to me that Nick Collins has played as good as he has. (Marquand) Manuel will be OK but he won't be able to play anything over the top."


As they said online, the "glory days" are fading into history, now today, with another major prime time embarrassing day loss to the "BEARS", unbearable, for the Pack on nfl fox sports in front of the nation.

I know how it is, when a rich great tradition can be surrounded by idiots who have no clue or the talents to do the things necessary, anything major, about resolving a losing situation into a positive new, winning direction. You cannot take such people seriously, who simply can be brushed off by saying, "It'S NOT ENOUGH". These loonies are people who will short you, cheapsakes, while pushing their own ambitions/job goals. I left those types of wanna bes, " " Americans behind a long time ago,


A final lesson from recent drafts: in the coming weeks, the need for quality draft picks with consistent elite talent.

Finally, as for the panic talk about the need for patience with a 2-3 years rebuilding plan, maybe 4 years??, ...sounds like the 1970s and 1980s "sound familiar" talk. Who has the time???

One is reminded about the climax from the trilogy movies, a classic, of the "Lord of the Rings, episode: The Two Towers", when the king says in the scene "Where is the horse and rider?": "How did it come to this?"

[Fritz]

It's not as if this team is old and decrepit. It's a young team, and young players make mistakes. I think it will get better, every week.

[TOP HAT]

As deputy nutz said, "Perfectly predictable" scenario.