An example of how quickly things could turn around.....

[RashanGary]

- Brett retires, opening up 11 million dollars in cap space next off season
- Rodgers has a great off season, physically stronger than ever and just as motivated to learn as this year. McCarthy shows his worth.
- The Packers draft Calvin Johnson, immediately changing the way defenses approach the Greenbay Packers.
- Ted Thompson finially splurges on the FA market and signs RB Thomas Jones to a lucrative deal. *Jones is a beast*
- Barnett gets extended early, allowing Sanders to press him to the SLB position
- Hodge immediately wins the starting MLB position, hiding his coverage problems and amplifying his run strength
- Carroll takes yet another step, passing Woodson as the #2 CB and allowing Woodson to play Saftey.
- Colledge, Spitz, Moll all hit the weights hard in the off season. They come in looking like Wahle, Flanigan and Rivera in their primes. The running game takes off and Rodgers has more than enough time to pass the ball to his elite WR weapons. Thompson has what looks to be another stellar draft, landing a bunch of good future starters.

Some guys will probably get arrested, guys will show up fat and out of shape. Thompson won't get a RB this off season and we'll have a glaring hole again. Carroll will have a horrible off season, running into problems with the law and forcing Woodson to play CB where he is already 2 steps slow and not quick enough. KGB lose another step of explosion, taking away any advantage he ever had. Spitz, Moll and Coilledge will all prove to SUCK and we won't have any answer to the OL Favre will stick around and take away any chance we have to afford acctual players who will be here when we have a chance.

Well, it could go good and it could go incredibly bad. I tend to be a little optimistic and I expect most of the young gusy to step up and for Thompson to find one really good FA player worth spending on. *Not Charles Woodson*

[retailguy]

So, this past season, WHO should Thompson have spent money on?


LeCharles Bentley? Mmmm. NO
Mike Vanderjagt? Mmmm. NO
Terrell Owens? Mmmm. NO
Lavar Arrington? Mmmm. NO
One of the 6 other offensive linemen on the Cleveland DL? Mmmm NO.

I'm sure I forgot 3 guys who have been *stars* for their new team. Hutchinson has played well, for example, but at what cost? You can't wrap that salary into our offensive line. You've got no money for other areas.

The only trade/signing that Thompson passed up that I thought was both a good value, and a tremendous help to the weakest area of the team was Jeff Faine.

That, of course, presupposes that Wells would have made a decent guard. I thought so, but, apparently, TT and M3 disagreed with me.


You can always look in hindsight and say - "We shoulda got that guy"....

Life doesn't work that way. Either the players will develop, or they won't. But they have to play for us to know that. Wishing Favre would retire ends an era, be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.... and it might not look AT ALL like you forcasted.

Woodson is not a bad signing. He'll be at safety next season, most likely. Carroll needed a swift kick in the rear, and got one, he's, overall, played better so far. Too soon to make a judgement, however.

[Tony Oday]

Favre continues to play next year at a bargain

Jennings continues his development

Driver doesnt lose a step

Thomas Jones goes to his hated rival and crushes Urslacker on runs up the middle

Barnett gets his contract and hodge excels at MLB

Hawk is an all pro

O line gels nicely

Carrol is drug out in the street and shot and the fans rejoice

Woodson is moved to saftey

Two rookie CB are drafted

FA we get Thomas Jones as stated before, Freeney, and a CB to take over for Woodson.

[RashanGary]

Yeah Retailguy..

I didn't think Thompson did too bad considering all the FA's got way overpaid this off season. Woodson was a bargain compared to many of them. I just can't stand Charles Woodson. Maybe he'll be a good safty.

As far as Favre retiring, how much worse can it get? He lost 14 of his last 16 games, ooohhh. We gonna lose them all? Kitna won more games in cincy and we all know he's not fantastic. QB is the most important position, but you can get by with a decent one if you build the rest of your team. Rodgers might be just fine. I'm ready to find out. Favre will not be here when any meaningfull games are played. We might as well move forward now instead of delaying it.

[Rastak]

So, this past season, WHO should Thompson have spent money on?


LeCharles Bentley? Mmmm. NO
Mike Vanderjagt? Mmmm. NO
Terrell Owens? Mmmm. NO
Lavar Arrington? Mmmm. NO
One of the 6 other offensive linemen on the Cleveland DL? Mmmm NO.

I'm sure I forgot 3 guys who have been *stars* for their new team. Hutchinson has played well, for example, but at what cost? You can't wrap that salary into our offensive line. You've got no money for other areas.

The only trade/signing that Thompson passed up that I thought was both a good value, and a tremendous help to the weakest area of the team was Jeff Faine.

That, of course, presupposes that Wells would have made a decent guard. I thought so, but, apparently, TT and M3 disagreed with me.


You can always look in hindsight and say - "We shoulda got that guy"....

Life doesn't work that way. Either the players will develop, or they won't. But they have to play for us to know that. Wishing Favre would retire ends an era, be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.... and it might not look AT ALL like you forcasted.

Woodson is not a bad signing. He'll be at safety next season, most likely. Carroll needed a swift kick in the rear, and got one, he's, overall, played better so far. Too soon to make a judgement, however.



Why not Bentley? You have no idea if he gets hurt this year when playing for Green Bay. Plus, how goood would he look at gaurd? Then again, maybe he isn't good in the ZBS.


As far as dumping a large portion of cap into your offensive line, I found this in an article in a Chicago paper today.....

"The Bears are one of 15 teams spending more than $20 million on the offensive line, and they rank second behind the Vikings with an offensive-line payroll just over $25 million. The Super Bowl champion Pittsburgh Steelers are next with about a million less than the Bears"

I think it's a good place to spend money. Green Bay was a helluva team when they had a dominant OL. I know Seattle was dumping good money into their OL.

[MJZiggy]

If you had a choice between dumping money into your o-line or your d-line, which would you do?

[Rastak]

If you had a choice between dumping money into your o-line or your d-line, which would you do?


Good question....it's a tie. Seriously, I'm not sure, and that's why I don't GM a team in the NFL. They are both pretty important. No DL means secondary gets torched and no OL means no offense.

[GoPack06]

- sign Thomas Jones. a 28 year old running back who has had one good season and i don't mean great just good. 1335 yards is not that special.

- Draft Calvin Johnson the next great WR aka the next head case. The future T.O

Or

you can draft Adrian Peterson and sign Michael "burner" Turner, who would come much cheaper and younger.

Sign Nate Clements

[RashanGary]

All positions are important. Good teams seem to be tough on front 7 defense, one safty, a good OL and a QB.

I guess that would be the most common winning combo. Great WR's and great CB's, RB's, WR's havn't been as critical lately. I don't know, mabe it's just by chance, just seems like the great teams lately have had a few things in common.

Our OL seems to be pass protecting OK wich is a big step up from last season. They just need to start cutting down backside pursuit and some big gains will open up in the run game. I saw a couple plays where if the LG or LT would have taken his guy down, Green would have had room to run on a cutback. We might just be OK on the OL by the end of the year.

I'm starting to see the beauty of the Zone game. They have 2 or 3 plays. Run right and run left are the only ones I see. Anyway, when they start going right, the whole DL starts pushing right. All the LG needs to do is dive at the NT's knees and a big cluster of fat asses is lying on the backside of the run game. Now the LT is open to seal off a LB and Green has room to run. Anyway, it's not working because we havn't done our job sealing off teh backside and Green runs right into a DT who should be lying on the ground holding his damn knee :)

[Fritz]

Well, I can at least say that I now too see how it's supposed to work. It ain't working that way - yet - but I now get the idea. It would work well for Ahman Green, too.

[mmmdk]

Ask yourself; how many thrifty teams have made it to the SB? Before you hammer your respond onto your keyboard, know this, I believe TT did the right thing - cleaning the house. But eventually you gotta spend some $$ and I'd rather millions spent on a premium OL than some no good/half good WR like Randle El. TT better start spending next season. For now all is OK, TT can still build through the draft but you need stars/good vets too and the vets Packers have are hardly stellar (e.g. KGB, Clifton, Henderson, Franks). You better not be known as THRIFTY TT, you hear TT!?

[RashanGary]

NE, Pittsburgh, Seattle, PHilly just to name a few.

Just about every team has to be thrifty. Shit, the Packers were thrifty too. The got Rison Dotson, Jones and Robinson for peanuts. White was a bargain considering he was the best defender in teh game still.

Every team taht wins, gets mroe production than they do pay. The problem is, GB doesn't have anyone left to pay. Thompson better draft well or he'll be forced to blwo it in teh overpriced FA market.

[Partial]

NE, Pittsburgh, Seattle, PHilly just to name a few.

Just about every team has to be thrifty. Shit, the Packers were thrifty too. The got Rison Dotson, Jones and Robinson for peanuts. White was a bargain considering he was the best defender in teh game still.

Every team taht wins, gets mroe production than they do pay. The problem is, GB doesn't have anyone left to pay. Thompson better draft well or he'll be forced to blwo it in teh overpriced FA market.

no offense, but do you actually know what you are talking about in this stuff? There are a slew of inaccuracies within this thread.

[BlueBrewer]

So, this past season, WHO should Thompson have spent money on?


LeCharles Bentley? Mmmm. NO Hurt
Mike Vanderjagt? Mmmm. NO Hurt and Bad
Terrell Owens? Mmmm. NO Headcase and Hurt
Lavar Arrington? Mmmm. NO Hurt, lingering
One of the 6 other offensive linemen on the Cleveland DL? Mmmm NO.

I'm sure I forgot 3 guys who have been *stars* for their new team. Hutchinson has played well, for example, but at what cost? You can't wrap that salary into our offensive line. You've got no money for other areas.

The only trade/signing that Thompson passed up that I thought was both a good value, and a tremendous help to the weakest area of the team was Jeff Faine.

That, of course, presupposes that Wells would have made a decent guard. I thought so, but, apparently, TT and M3 disagreed with me.


You can always look in hindsight and say - "We shoulda got that guy"....

Life doesn't work that way. Either the players will develop, or they won't. But they have to play for us to know that. Wishing Favre would retire ends an era, be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.... and it might not look AT ALL like you forcasted.

Woodson is not a bad signing. He'll be at safety next season, most likely. Carroll needed a swift kick in the rear, and got one, he's, overall, played better so far. Too soon to make a judgement, however.

[MJZiggy]

Why are Thomas jones, Michael Turner and Nate Clements not being resigned by their current teams?

[RashanGary]

Why are Thomas jones, Michael Turner and Nate Clements not being resigned by their current teams?

The Bears have soem tough choices. They can't keep everybody because their roster is so loaded adn a bunch of them are headign for big paydays.

They have Benson who is a good RB. They might see Jones as being more expendable than Lance Briggs. I don't know though. We'll see.

I think it would be smart of us to at least pressure the Bears by offering him a nice fair contract and make them pay for his services if they want him. I think we could pry him from the soon to be cap strapped Chicago team.

[BF4MVP]

Draft Calvin Johnson the next great WR aka the next head case. The future T.O

It's obvious you don't know anything about Calvin at all.

[wist43]

Nice scenario GJ... but, it won't happen.

I'm becoming convinced that TT is in over his head... he simply doesn't have the vision to build a winner. I'm not calling for his head yet, but I'm very skeptical he, or M3, will be able build a winner.

Team chemistry, special teams, OL play, hiring Schottenheimer back, signing Koren Robinson out of desperation, letting Wahle and Walker go, etc, etc, etc...

What he's done so far isn't pretty.

[BEARMAN]

Hey, what are they putting in that KoolAid ya all are drinking ? :shock:
You packerrats will stay right where you belong, in the gutter for along time to come ! :twisted:
Keep repeeting to yourselves, next year, next year, next year... Next year never comes boys ! LMFAO !
Silly packers, the NFCN belongs to DA BEARS ! :mrgreen:


GO BEARS !

[RashanGary]

Wist,

We'll see. I agree it sure doesn't look good so far. The Packers really are starting over though. It happens in the NFL.

He stripped the team down with no regard for how far we'd fall. He's going to stick with his plan even though it hurts really bad right now.

I don't know that what happened last season and what is happening now are direct indicators of what will happen tomorrow.

We're building from the ground up. I guess that excites me more that what we were doing the last 3 or 4 years of borderline competitiveness.

[jack's smirking revenge]

We're building from the ground up. I guess that excites me more that what we were doing the last 3 or 4 years of borderline competitiveness.

Agreed.

tyler

[MJZiggy]

Bearman, not the troll I was hoping to see, but your timing is good even if nothing else is. The above statement by GJ has me wondering exactly what the Bears salary cap looks like for the upcoming year. Where will you be in relation to the cap when it's time to start locking players up to their bigger contracts?

[Scott Campbell]

We're building from the ground up. I guess that excites me more that what we were doing the last 3 or 4 years of borderline competitiveness.



I agree with you, but it comes with some risk. They're nurturing a culture of losing for the time being, and that can sometimes be difficult to shake.

[RashanGary]

no offense, but do you actually know what you are talking about in this stuff? There are a slew of inaccuracies within this thread.

FACT - The Packers had no more money to spend in the 95-96 season than anybody else. *It's called a salary cap*

FACT - The Packers got more production out of their roster than any other NFL team. *Superbowl W*

With those two facts in mind, one could reasonably deduct that the Packers got more production than what they actually paid for in relation to what other teams were getting with their money. The logic used to deduct this conclusion would not assume that all teams who spend all their money should have equal talent. Clearly each dollar spent is not equal to a dollar of production accross the board. The fact the Packers roster was IMO clearly better than any other roster that year shows that the Packers were actually paying the same amount of money as other teams *salary cap* but getting more production. It could be reasonably deducted that the Packers really got good value for the money that they spent in that season. Value and thrifty ring up in my head as similar economic concepts. Maybe you, partial can explain to me how you think the NFL salary cap effects talent and more importantly wins. I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for your brilliant response.

The thing about being thrifty, as you guys say, is that it isn't a quick fix. You don't draft 52 good players in one off season. you don't find 15 value FA pick ups in one off season. The Packers had adopted a process of actually using more money than they had the few years leading up to Thompson’s reign. Essentially they were buying time. Instead of simply using what they had that year, they creatively borrowed for future years bringing on what eventually became a real salary cap problem. This was a big part as I look back as to why the Packers eventually had to start over because they could no longer borrow from the future and Harlan could no longer justify keeping Sherman who planned on doing that exact tactic until none was left. Also, 4 or 5 years of bad drafts contributed over time to the NFLE depth that were starting to experience. There wasn’t' one capable backup OG. Not one OT. Unless you consider Pooper a capable RB, there wasn't one of those either. Safety’s's? CB's? LB's? DE's? DT's? QB's? WR's? The depth was stripped. We didn't have one back up player capable of starting on another team. Again, I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for the easy solution for this problem. I'm of the belief that any instantaneous quick fixes would have bought some time and filled a hole for now but that the team was sliding and was not going to win any meaningful games no matter what happened. Please, brilliant Partial, explain to me how you would have fixed these problems in one or two off seasons. Explain to me how this team had any reasonable chance at a SB run *what is the goal, you may have forgotten that*.

It was time to start over. It was time to stop borrowing from future years. In fact, it was becoming increasingly hard to borrow because like good choices that build up to a climax, bad choices descend to a disgusting valley. Thompson wasted no time tearing it down and starting over. Instead of going with the quick fix that would buy time today, he's taking a path that he believe will get him to the SB one day. You may not agree with it, you may not understand how this concept "thrifty" applies to the NFL but don’t' throw some stupid one liner at me and pretend like you know what you’re talking about .

Fact is, you don't and you'll probably respond accordingly. Let's here your solutions wise ass. Let's hear what the brilliant Partial would have done because obviously we were just a couple pieces away and should be competitive right now.

Firing Sherman the GM was the best move Harlan ever made, but it wasn't enough to make up for the worst move he ever made, hiring him. 5 years of bad drafts will ruin any team and that is where we were. Sherman did a good job buying time but it was a matter of time before it crumbled. Deal with it. If anything, we should all be planning a scheme to burn Sherman’s house and torture his wife and children because the real villain can be summed up with one picture. Mike Sherman sleeping at the combine.

[Partial]

no offense, but do you actually know what you are talking about in this stuff? There are a slew of inaccuracies within this thread.

FACT - The Packers had no more money to spend in the 95-96 season than anybody else. *It's called a salary cap*

FACT - The Packers got more production out of their roster than any other NFL team. *Superbowl W*

With those two facts in mind, one could reasonably deduct that the Packers got more production than what they actually paid for in relation to what other teams were getting with their money. The logic used to deduct this conclusion would not assume that all teams who spend all their money should have equal talent assuming each dollar spent was equal to a dollar of production. The fact the Packers roster was IMO clearly better than any other roster that year shows that the Packers were actually paying the same amount of money as other teams *salary cap* but getting more production. It could be reasonably deducted that the Packers really got good value for the money that they spent in that season. Value and thrifty ring up in my head as similar economic concepts. Maybe you, partial can explain to me how you think the NFL salary cap effects talent and more importantly wins. I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for your brilliant response.

The thing about being thrifty as you guys say is that it isn't a quick fix. You don't draft 52 good players in one off season. you don't find 15 value FA pick ups in one off season. The Packers had adopted a process of actually using more money than they had the few years leading up to Thompson’s reign. Essentially they were buying time. Instead of simply using what they had that year, they creatively borrowed for future years bringing on what eventually became a real salary cap problem. This was a big part as I look back as to why the Packers eventually had to start over because they could no longer borrow from the future and Harlan could no longer justify keeping Sherman who planned on doing that exact tactic until none was left. Also, 4 or 5 years of bad drafts contributed over time to the NFLE depth that were starting to experience. There wasn’t' one capable backup OG. Not one OT. Unless you consider Pooper a capable RB, there wasn't one of those either. Safety’s's? CB's? LB's? DE's? DT's? QB's? WR's? The depth was stripped. We didn't have one back up player capable of starting on another team. Again, I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for the easy solution for this problem. I'm of the belief that any instantaneous quick fixes would have bought some time and filled a hole for now but that the team was sliding and was not going to win any meaningful games no matter what happened. Please, brilliant Partial, explain to me how you would have fixed these problems in one or two off seasons. Explain to me how this team had any reasonable chance at a SB run *what is the goal, you may have forgotten that*.

It was time to start over. It was time to stop borrowing from future years. In fact, it was becoming increasingly hard to borrow because like good choices that build up to a climax, bad choices descend to a disgusting valley. Thompson wasted no time tearing it down and starting over. Instead of going with the quick fix that would buy time today, he's taking a path that he believe will get him to the SB one day. You may not agree with it, you may not understand how this concept "thrifty" applies to the NFL but don’t' throw some stupid one liner at me and pretend like you know what you’re talking about .

Fact is, you don't and you'll probably respond accordingly. Let's here your solutions wise ass. Let's hear what the brilliant Partial would have done because obviously we were just a couple pieces away and should be competitive right now.

Firing Sherman the GM was the best move Harlan ever made, but it wasn't enough to make up for the worst move he ever made, hiring him. 5 years of bad drafts will ruin any team and that is where we were. Sherman did a good job buying time but it was a matter of time before it crumbled. Deal with it. If anything, we should all be planning a scheme to burn Sherman’s house and torture his wife and children because the real villain can be summed up with one picture. Mike Sherman sleeping at the combine.

What's with the hostility and personal slams? I wasn't even referencing your cap discussion. As a matter of fact, I have no idea what I was referencing, but I can read through later and refresh myself. I think I am going to change my name to the brilliant partial :D

See you guys Sunday, i'm off to work and then out to madtown to chill with the lady folk.

[RashanGary]

I've been very clear that I think getting value from a roster is the #1 reason why one team is better than another and the biggest reason wehy teams win the superbowl.

You could say playmakers with the absense of weak links make the difference as a general big picture rule and I agree with that, but you can't afford to keep playmakers if you don't make excellent value concious decsions so I use VALUE as the one word explaination for why teams are what they are. Value is a very broad term, indirectly it covers everything from playmakers, to good players to weak links. When it's all said and done, do you play at a level higher than you pay? If you can answer yes to taht and you've spent most of your money, you will be a winning team. I think most people know what I'm talking abotu even when I make unbacked one liners adn I've grown lazy with explaining it over and over but I just did 2 more times.


Nobody rudely askes HH for backing of why he believes Roman is a decent player even though he throws out unbacked one liners about Roman being missed. Why is that? Because everyone knows where he's coming from. You could have kept that snide remark to yourself and I could have kept mine.

[FritzDontBlitz]

i just love an optimistic thread.

[vince]

Hey, what are they putting in that KoolAid ya all are drinking ? :shock:
You packerrats will stay right where you belong, in the gutter for along time to come ! :twisted:
Keep repeeting to yourselves, next year, next year, next year... Next year never comes boys ! LMFAO !
Silly packers, the NFCN belongs to DA BEARS ! :mrgreen:


GO BEARS !
Bearman, at least come with something substantive to say, besides your mindless drivel of "The Bears are the greatest!" and "The Packers suck!"

We can figure out that your a Bear fan without your stupid trollivity.

[MJZiggy]

Sorry, Vince. I asked him a question that would have required him to actually know something about his team and he disappeared for some reason...

[vince]

Sorry, Vince. I asked him a question that would have required him to actually know something about his team and he disappeared for some reason...
He'll be back Zig. He always comes back, but I'll be surprised if he's knowledgeable or resourceful enough to answer your question...

Too much work. It's easier and less risky to say, "DA BEARS" and leave it at that.

[MJZiggy]

Does anyone know what kind of cap room the Bears are going to have going into the offseason? I couldn't find it.

[esoxx]

If anything, we should all be planning a scheme to burn Sherman’s house and torture his wife and children because the real villain can be summed up with one picture.


This is a little extreme. Couldn't we just burn down his shed or something?
:crazy:

[Bretsky]

Yeah Retailguy..

I didn't think Thompson did too bad considering all the FA's got way overpaid this off season. Woodson was a bargain compared to many of them. I just can't stand Charles Woodson. Maybe he'll be a good safty.

As far as Favre retiring, how much worse can it get? He lost 14 of his last 16 games, ooohhh. We gonna lose them all? Kitna won more games in cincy and we all know he's not fantastic. QB is the most important position, but you can get by with a decent one if you build the rest of your team. Rodgers might be just fine. I'm ready to find out. Favre will not be here when any meaningfull games are played. We might as well move forward now instead of delaying it.



This all depends how you look at Woodson's contract. I don't know a player in free agency that is more overpaid this year than Charles Woodson.

One could argue you have to look at the whole deal but who knows if he'll be around that long.

[b bulldog]

Anyone who compares Calvin to TO in regards to both being headcases, is just full of sh!t. Calvin by all means is a very good kid and wants to get better as a player.

[MJZiggy]

Yeah Retailguy..

I didn't think Thompson did too bad considering all the FA's got way overpaid this off season. Woodson was a bargain compared to many of them. I just can't stand Charles Woodson. Maybe he'll be a good safty.

As far as Favre retiring, how much worse can it get? He lost 14 of his last 16 games, ooohhh. We gonna lose them all? Kitna won more games in cincy and we all know he's not fantastic. QB is the most important position, but you can get by with a decent one if you build the rest of your team. Rodgers might be just fine. I'm ready to find out. Favre will not be here when any meaningfull games are played. We might as well move forward now instead of delaying it.



This all depends how you look at Woodson's contract. I don't know a player in free agency that is more overpaid this year than Charles Woodson.

One could argue you have to look at the whole deal but who knows if he'll be around that long.

Ooohh wait! I know this one!! LeCharles Bentley!!!

[Bretsky]

So, this past season, WHO should Thompson have spent money on?


LeCharles Bentley? Mmmm. NO
Mike Vanderjagt? Mmmm. NO
Terrell Owens? Mmmm. NO
Lavar Arrington? Mmmm. NO
One of the 6 other offensive linemen on the Cleveland DL? Mmmm NO.

I'm sure I forgot 3 guys who have been *stars* for their new team. Hutchinson has played well, for example, but at what cost? You can't wrap that salary into our offensive line. You've got no money for other areas.

.

There were several several players out there last year that could have really helped this team. And I'm not saying he should've signed them all; I just don't buy the defense of TT when people come out and say "who" could we have signed. I'd rather hear TT is tearing the Arc down and looking for wood to rebuild it because that would be more accurate IMO.

Anyways, here's a sampling of players we could have tried to entice:

OL
LeCharles Bentley
Vince Manuwai
Justin Hartwig
Kevin Mawae
Andre Gurode
Stephen Neal


Will Witherspoon
Akin Ayodele
David Thornton
Antonio Bryant
Maurice Morris
Andre Dyson
Darren Howard
Chris Hope
Chris Baker
Will Demps

[Harlan Huckleby]

.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Nobody rudely askes HH for backing of why he believes Roman is a decent player even though he throws out unbacked one liners about Roman being missed. Why is that? Because everyone knows where he's coming from. You could have kept that snide remark to yourself and I could have kept mine.

I don't understand what this means, but it sounds like lyrics to an angry Bob Dylan song.

[BEARMAN]

Ziggy, with the owners just adding 10 million onto the cap next year, from what I have read(the BEARS do not confide in me on their monitary matters) I think that Mr. Jones, Mr. Briggs will be paied the $$$ they are looking for. There are many ways to give a player the $$ he wants/deserves, signing bonuses, defered payments, incentive payments, ect, ect. I am quite sure that if DA BEARS want to retain the services of any player, the money will be spent acordingly.
Likewise, dont you packers have a bunch of $$$ under the cap? How much will trading Farve save you guys?

GO BEARS !

[woodbuck27]

Yeah Retailguy..

I didn't think Thompson did too bad considering all the FA's got way overpaid this off season. Woodson was a bargain compared to many of them. I just can't stand Charles Woodson. Maybe he'll be a good safty.

As far as Favre retiring, how much worse can it get? He lost 14 of his last 16 games, ooohhh. We gonna lose them all? Kitna won more games in cincy and we all know he's not fantastic. QB is the most important position, but you can get by with a decent one if you build the rest of your team. Rodgers might be just fine. I'm ready to find out. Favre will not be here when any meaningfull games are played. We might as well move forward now instead of delaying it.

OK Nostradomus, Oh yee with Superior Analytical Skills take a look into the crystal ball below and what do YOU see?

Packers ( 0-2-0 )

PASSING

.............CP/AT.. YDS... TD.... INT
B. Favre 31/55... 340.... 3....... 1


RUSHING

RUSHING

...............ATT..... YDS .....TD...... LG
A. Green ...16....... 42....... 0........ 8
D. Driver..... 1....... 16....... 0....... 16
N. Herron.... 3......... 5....... 0........ 3

I'll try to help YOU by proposing these questions:

What happens if YOUR Team can't establish the run?

a) The Team must then rely on the passing /receiving game to win anyway.

b) If the run isn't established the Team gets beat up on both sides of the ball, as the Teams Defense is forced on the field too long during the course of the game compared to the Oppositions Defense.

Question:

Now if this condition, of NOT establishing the Run was to continue, game after game...after game, after game ....on and on.... would this:

a) Assist your team's defense, by giving the players more game ready exoperience....as in ... " Bring it on suckaaa !"

b) Tend to lead to more risk or actual injuries (adversity) on your team's defense.

Would the above condition:Place your team's defensive depth to the test more than planned considering the real talent in depth?

Take your time with this one.

a) YES

b) NO


Question:

What option's does the HC have in calling plays, if the RUN fails, game after game?

a) Be content with 3 and outs, because he really desires to see just how good his defense is under as much pressure as possible? He doesn't like the players on defense anyway.

b) Go to his GM and SCREAM at him to get HELP for the OL.

c) Go to his GM and ask him pretty please, to get him some help on the OL and offer anything in return for relief.

Question:

Is 55 pass's in a game...

a) > the normal for a NFL game plan ?

b) < avg. for pass's for a NFL game plan?

c) about right or close to the NFL average in an NFL Game Plan?


If a QB passed 55 times in each of 16 G in the NFL Schedule.That ='s Ohhhh,let me see... 880 Pass's Total for the season.

Question (and without cheating and checking the record book)

Would that break the NFL Record for pass's Total in a 16G Season?

a) Yes.

b) Not even close


Three Part Essay Question: ( In 20 word's or less )

a) What did Brett Favre say recently if a Team has to pass the ball 40 times or more in a game ?

b) Was his response to that scenario positive or negative regarding winning?

c) Did he make that comment before or after last Sunddays game in Lambeau Field with " the Saints " ?

a) Obviously, after the Saints game. Because, if he said it before the game his HC and possibly his GM would have gone over everything to ensure 40 pass's or more wasn't in the realm of possibility ie The GM would get out the Bullwhip and take it to the business side if the OL wasn't ready/totally up to scratch.

Noone wants Ted to take that thing out, and "whip it!.. whip it... good "

b) Brett Favre said it before the game. As he saw /knew "Mike McCarthy's SECRET Game Plan, and gently or diplomatically was telling all Packer fans not to bet the House on "the Packers" in the upcoming Saints game.


Question and YOU may use your calculator:

A game where a QB makes 55 passing attempts is more likely or less likely to result in turnovers via interceptions (picks)?

a) more likely ... as the game progress as the QB's arm strength will decline as the number of throws rises and reduce both the velocity on his throws and also then the accuracy.

b) less likely... as Brett Favre needs the first 25 - 30 pass's just to get warmed up. He's really humming the ball after 45 -50 pass's.

Question: You may go to that booth... over..... there

to enable some solitude and dead silence to really concentrate on geting a correct response to this next skill testing question.

You have 10 minutes booth time to formulate your response...

Good Luck GregJennings

Taking away Donald Driver's 1 run of 16 yards and looking then at the RB avg. of 2.47 Yards/carry.

Is a result of 2.47 Yards/carry...

a) GOOD?

b) BAD ?

[Terry]

As far as dumping a large portion of cap into your offensive line, I found this in an article in a Chicago paper today.....

"The Bears are one of 15 teams spending more than $20 million on the offensive line, and they rank second behind the Vikings with an offensive-line payroll just over $25 million. The Super Bowl champion Pittsburgh Steelers are next with about a million less than the Bears"

I think it's a good place to spend money. Green Bay was a helluva team when they had a dominant OL. I know Seattle was dumping good money into their OL.

New England are spending $10 million on their O-Line.

[Terry]

Firing Sherman the GM was the best move Harlan ever made, but it wasn't enough to make up for the worst move he ever made, hiring him. 5 years of bad drafts will ruin any team and that is where we were. Sherman did a good job buying time but it was a matter of time before it crumbled.

Sherman had three drafts. Ok, arguably, he had influence in a 4th, but we'll never find out with any accuracy just how much. And maybe Thompson listened to him too, but I'm dubious. Whatever, only THREE drafts were exclusively his.

[esoxx]

Whatever, only THREE drafts were exclusively his.

Which was three drafts too many.

[mngolf19]

Said it before and I'll say it again. Teams win with OL and DL. They cover up weaknesses in all other areas. You try to draft and develop these guys, but if you can plug a hole immediately with FA, you do it. There just aren't that many really good Linemen out there. All other positions can be developed or purchased at much lower cost as you don't have to have great players everywhere else if you are strong on the lines. I would ALWAYS spend more money on the lines than anywhere else.

[MJZiggy]

But if you could only fix one line at a time, do you fix O, or D?

[mngolf19]

But if you could only fix one line at a time, do you fix O, or D?

To me, it doesn't matter. They are equally important. So who is available? That's who I take. And you keep building on that with depth as well. If you get very good and deep on one side, then you can put more FA money and/or draft picks on the other side.

[Terry]

Whatever, only THREE drafts were exclusively his.

Which was three drafts too many.
Sigh. Not at all. Sherman made some serious mistakes drafting, certainly. He also made some very good picks. He didn't have much luck with some, but some might have developed better under better position coaching.

Mostly people's big problem with Sherman's drafts is that he didn't value his picks enough to hang onto them. Well, sure, there's some validity in that. But people should remember that he was assigned a different task, a different job description than Thompson and for Sherman, some trading up made perfect sense, in principle, if not always in practice. He'll probably be hung in effigy forever for Sander and maybe justly. But Walker, on the other hand, was a brilliant pick, which practically no one recognized on the day he made it. The trade for Harris was also very, very good - given what he was trying to achieve.

People's hindsight on Sherman is nothing short of remarkable. I doubt if he would be viewed quite so critically if he was still here. It's a basic principle of psychology that people most heavily rag on those who aren't part of the organisation. And he certainly wouldn't be ragged on so heavily if memories weren't quite so deceptive to perspective.

I'm not a Sherman apologist. I've come down quite heavily on his coaching failures. But all in all, he made some mistakes, he had some bad luck, and he couldn't quite get it done. That's all there was to it. He wasn't half so good a coach as people like to think (though he might still have been every bit as good as Holmgren), and he wasn't half so bad as GM as popular opinion has it.

[Rastak]

As far as dumping a large portion of cap into your offensive line, I found this in an article in a Chicago paper today.....

"The Bears are one of 15 teams spending more than $20 million on the offensive line, and they rank second behind the Vikings with an offensive-line payroll just over $25 million. The Super Bowl champion Pittsburgh Steelers are next with about a million less than the Bears"

I think it's a good place to spend money. Green Bay was a helluva team when they had a dominant OL. I know Seattle was dumping good money into their OL.

New England are spending $10 million on their O-Line.


And they are not favored this year either.

[BallHawk]

Draft Calvin Johnson the next great WR aka the next head case. The future T.O

Ok, I'm not for drafting Calvin Johnson. I think WR in the top 5 are risky and uneccesary. However, Calvin Johnson is the anti-TO. Over the summer he went to Bolivia to help the needy and he is going back again in the spring, I've also heard he is a great lockeroom presence.

[The Shadow]

Whatever lumps we take this year, keep in mind :
That young offensive line -next year - will have a season of playing together under their belts.
The defense will have a full year of adapting to the scheme.
The promising linebacker corp will have profited by this year's struggles.
Rodgers, Jennings, Hawk, Hodge, Poppinga, Underwood, Blackmon, Colledge, Spitz, Moll, Wells, Jolly - all of our new yound talent - will have another year's seasoning.
It's better to be on the way up than desperately trying to plug holes in a sinking ship - what we had been doing during Sherman's tenure.
Hail to the future!

[Rastak]

Whatever lumps we take this year, keep in mind :
That young offensive line -next year - will have a season of playing together under their belts.
The defense will have a full year of adapting to the scheme.
The promising linebacker corp will have profited by this year's struggles.
Rodgers, Jennings, Hawk, Hodge, Poppinga, Underwood, Blackmon, Colledge, Spitz, Moll, Wells, Jolly - all of our new yound talent - will have another year's seasoning.
It's better to be on the way up than desperately trying to plug holes in a sinking ship - what we had been doing during Sherman's tenure.
Hail to the future!


I thought the defensive scheme was the same as last year?


I agree that a years seasoning will help if the guys are good, but if they aren't that great it ain't gonna help.


Are they great or good? I don't know, I'm just a fan.

[The Shadow]

Well, we will find out how good they are - and how keen a talent evaluator Thompson is - as time goes by.
The job isn't going to be completed overnight, and some of the pieces will need to be adjusted/replaced. Next year's draft and free agency period will again be a huge factor.
But I'm confident that the team is on the right track. Hawk, Jennings, Collins, Rodgers, Hodge, etc. are a great start to building a contender.

[Bretsky]

I'd agree TT has a nice start with finding some rookie talent; it should be interesting to see how he handles Nick Barnett, one of our top defensive players. If his goal is to completely tear down the ship and make this into a four year project letting Barnett go and figuring Hodge can step in may be the next step. It'd be insane IMO to let this happen; but it wouldn't surprise me the least either. I suppose it'd make Wist happy if nothing else.

[esoxx]

Whatever, only THREE drafts were exclusively his.

Which was three drafts too many.
Sigh. Not at all.

Yeah, if only we could have had two or three or four more drafts with Sherman, this team would be something. You certainly sound like a Sherman apologist. That's fine, btw, just don't defend his horrible GM stint and then claim you're not.