STIRRING THE TT POT AGAIN ..."FOR THE FUTURE"

[Bretsky]

RANDOM THOUGHTS ON THIS SATURDAY

Ted has been on the job 21 months. His apologists justify his moves by the long term rebuilding of "the future". They are willing to dismiss many moves, OR LACK THEREOF, by using this rebuilding for the future theory.

Last season was ugly; we saw it get worse when players went down. It was clear to me that last season was all about clearing cap issues so we can come out swinging hard this year in free agency and the draft.

We entered 2006 with a LOAD of cap money to significantly upgrade our team, and the highest first round draft pick since the days of Mandarich and Fullwood. But Ted struck out looking in free agency. In fact, I think he took all three strikes looking.

As more aggressive teams addressed their needs by coming out swinging, Green Bay's $35,000,000 cap space went largely unspent when quality free agents like Will Weatherspoon signed with other teams.

All in the name of "The Future". Be patient. Wait and See. Next year. I think I have been pretty fair with TT.

I've given TT some credit for draft picks and trade downs. I like the Pickett signing. But other than that he's been less than lousy in free agency. After sitting in his recliner for much of free agency Teddy intentionally decides to frontload a contract for Charles Woodsen largely to use up cap space. The for the future crowd will look at what great cap position we will be in next year. I was looking at that same thing before last year's free agency Packer hibernation.

After cutting Rod Gardner, who seemed at least barely adaquate last year, TT decided to go into this year with 4 active WR's. A bit surprising to me, but he had resportedly been a disappointment this year.

But knowing of Robinson's probable suspension before the trade deadline and then Fergy's injury, we heard little of TT's efforts to bring in a quality WR. Did he try ? I'd hope so, but I'm starting to be more of a doubter.

And is Brewster and Bookman really the best out there ? Maybe we can find the next flavor of the day after our Taco like experiment last year; but it's doubtful. An effort for Willie Ponder would have looked real nice now. Tyrone Calico anyone ?

If those circumstances didn't warrant making a move, what will ? That's right.... the season's already a rough one so we're looking at young guys in the name of the future.

Normally we place the burden of winning on the players and coach giving his all; I'd like to start asking more of Ted Thompson. Not that expectations are high, but an injury to either Driver or Jennings puts a dagger in our ability to compete.

In this day and age, you don't have to completley tear down the arc before starting to rebuild it. You can replace some bad wood with better wood before the best wood in found. I'd venture to say Ted Thompson does not agree with that.

The apologists will say TT is looking toward the future. I'd like to ask them WHEN does the future become now. Not sure if it's anytime soon based on his moves.


B

[Tony Oday]

I would have to say I like some moves dont care about some moves and Hate some moves:

Like:
Hawk
Jennings
Collins
Pickett
Moll
Spitz(I really like this guy)
AR
Getting Green Back
Getting rid of Carrol
getting rid of Sander
Signing Manuel (sure he sucks but I liked the signing at the time so did everyone else)
Henderson
Fire Sherman
Resigning Kamp

Indifferent about
Poppigna I still think he sucks but I would LOVE to be wrong
Longwell goes Bye-Bye
Gardner here and gone
Dumping Leach
Handling of Al Harris's contract
Taylor signing

Dont Like:
Trading Gado(F YOU TT YOU OWE ME A JERSEY!)
Signing Woodson! WTF sure it added some excitement BUT WHY NOT LAW!
Not getting a decent RB to replace a broken down Green
Letting MM get Shitty as the DB coach!
Not signing a decent WR! Ponder or someone like that not a game breaker but a return guy that can fill in you know like that little guy we let go ah what was his name TT? OH yeah CHATMAN!
Letting Sherman come back at all!
Failing TWO YEARS IN A ROW to get 4 decent NFL not NFLE WR

I think he has done a decent to average Job.

So Far C+

If the future plans work out he could VAULT into an A+ or plunge to a F-.

[esoxx]

Great summation B. I echo your thoughts completely. TT needs to use all the tools at his disposal, which includes the draft, FA and trades. Heaven forbid he give up a mid to late round pick to acquire some vet OG or WR help when needed. He won't do that but will take flyers on a guy like Cory Rodgers in the draft.

The Packers have a wealth of resources at their disposal to get the job done. TT needs to step it up this next off-season and shore up things that need shorin' up.

I agree that the Packers needed rebuilding, but you don't have to take a wrecking ball approach. Forrest Gregg did that in '85 and just how did that turn out? Anyone can tear down, the hard part is building back up. Use the resources TT.

His biggest mistake so far is drafting Rodgers with his first pick. Talk about drafting for the future. With FA, this is more of a win-now league. Unless you think he's special, like a Carson Palmer, you can't afford a #1 toiling on the bench for years b/c his contract is up before you know what you have or you risk losing him. I doubt Rodgers is that type of special player.

[Bretsky]

""His biggest mistake so far is drafting Rodgers with his first pick. Talk about drafting for the future. With FA, this is more of a win-now league. Unless you think he's special, like a Carson Palmer, you can't afford a #1 toiling on the bench for years b/c his contract is up before you know what you have or you risk losing him. I doubt Rodgers is that type of special player"""


I AGREE

YOU DON'T HAVE TO DRAFT A QB; YOU CAN PICK ONE DECENT ONE UP EVERY YEAR IN THE TRANSITION.

AND FOR THOSE WHO SAY....WELL......WHO'D HE HAVE DRAFTED THAT HAD A FIRST ROUND GRADE ?

MIKE PATTERSON WOULD HAVE BEEN A SOLID DL .........THERE WERE OTHER NICE FINDS THERE AS WELL

I'M ASSUMING NOBODY WAS TOUCHING ODELL THURMAN THAT EARLY DUE TO HIS HORRID BACKGROUND :neutral:

[Joemailman]

To answer your question B, I think the future becomes now in 2007. The Packers should be in a position to challenge for the playoffs next year. If that is not the case, there will be some tough questions that need answering. John Jones becomes the new President next spring. I know he was somewhat invoolved in the TT hiring, but if he does not like the direction the team is heading, he may not show the type of patience that Harlan would.

[Patler]

RANDOM THOUGHTS ON THIS SATURDAY

But knowing of Robinson's probable suspension before the trade deadline and then Fergy's injury, we heard little of TT's efforts to bring in a quality WR. Did he try ? I'd hope so, but I'm starting to be more of a doubter.

And is Brewster and Bookman really the best out there ? Maybe we can find the next flavor of the day after our Taco like experiment last year; but it's doubtful. An effort for Willie Ponder would have looked real nice now. Tyrone Calico anyone ?

B

If Ponder or Calico are so interesting, how come in just the last two weeks the following teams filled WR needs by doing the following:

Bengals put a WR on IR, signed Glenn Holt from their practice squad.
Texans signed David Anderson from their practice squad.
Tampa signed Chad Lucas.
Miami released a WR, signed Vick from their practice squad.
Detroit signed Devale Ellis from their practice squad.
Arizona signed Carlyle Holiday from their practice squad.
MN releasedMann and signed Bethel Johnson.
N.E. signed Jabar Gaffney.

In just two weeks covering transactions before and after the Packers signed Francies eight other teams passed on these guys, in spite of making moves involving wide receivers. You can ignore Miami's move involving Vick if you want, its hard to say what all is behind that, but that still leaves 7 others.

[Packnut]

The TT supporters say all is well as long as we're improving. Well open your eyes. Let's go back to last season and look at the WR situation. It was a HUGE problem for us. Now fast forward to this season. How has it improved? We're in the same boat being short at WR. Your gonna say he drafted Jennings. Well that arguement is total BS cause he gave up Walker. I won't even argue that imo Walker is a better WR. So let's call that a draw.

The fact is that after a whole freakin year, it has'nt improved so where did TTdo such a fabulous job? How did he improve our WR corps? He did'nt, just like he did nothing to improve our RB situation. Morency can't hold onto the ball, (by the way, what was TT smoking when he trades for a RB from a team that was desperate for one)? Ya think Houston knew Morency had fumbleitis?

I would love to buy the we're improving BS but the facts say that so far, TT has not improved us in even 1 area. Our secondary gives up more yds than ever. When has ANY of our LB's made a game changing play? Hawk is all about potential. Our D line Still does'nt pressure the QB on any consistent basis. The OL seem's to be better but they were so bad at the beginning that anything look's better. The ram's run D is not exactly the lithmus test.

It's funny that the same guys who support TT here are the same ones who believe this "re-building" is normal and they accept losing very easily. What happens IF we end up with a worse record than last season? Are you still gonna tell us we're improving under TT?????????????????????????

[Patler]

My whole point is that there really is nothing out there for wide receivers to get the "quick fix" at the position that you criticize TT for not accomplishing. Everyone seems to just sign their own PS guys when the need arises. You can say, "make a trade" but in view of the rest of the roster, is now the time to make that investment? And for who? Someone else's disgruntled player? Mostly teams are willing to trade their 4th receiver, maybe their 3rd for more than he is worth, but that's all. As for TT improving nothing, I disagree.

Are you really suggesting that having Hawk, Hodge, Taylor and yes, even Poppinga from last year isn't a better group of linebackers than Thomas, Lenon, Manning, and the seemingly always injured Diggs (even though I always liked Diggs as a player)? Even if you argue they are no better right now (I would disagree), clearly there is more promise for the future.

Same for the O-line. Colledge, Spitz and Moll show clear promise for the future, and seem to be playing better even now than Klemm, Whitticker and Ruegamer and Wells as a guard last year. I would even argue that Wells is performing better at center than Flanagan last year, even if he is not to the standards of Flanagan of 4 years ago or so. Flanagan was never going to be there again either.

Losing Wahle and Walker were not good thinigs. But Flanagan and Rivera had had their run. They will decline steadily from injuries and age.

Sherman's success in won/loss record did not reflect the status of the roster. No other team in the division even had a winning record during the Sherman years. Being .500 was not all that difficult when 6 games were against the weaker teams in the league before you even looked at the non-divisional games, and you had a QB like Favre in his prime and one of the best runningbacks in the league for 5 years. If you want to really see where the Packers stood, look at their record since 2000 against teams that ended the year with winning records. I've posted it here several times. It was very poor, an indication that inspite of a lot of wins, they were not one of the better teams, merely an average one that played more than their fair share of weak teams, and a team that was aging with few quality replacements inhouse.

This was a mediocre roster in quality, and it finally came home to roost at the same time as salary cap difficulties surfaced. That's why the roster was "blown up". There was very little foundation to build on.

I will never forget TT's comment in an interview before the draft in 2005. When asked if anything surprised him in his first few months on the job, the first thing he said was that after studying all the game films from 2004, the roster was not what he expected. My take was that he thought a winning team would have a better roster than what GB had.

[SD GB fan]

i see ppl are getting impatient. heres to winning the next few games and forgetting this issue.

[The Shadow]

Personally, I like most of his moves.
I think much better days lie ahead.

[mraynrand]

Sherman's success in won/loss record did not reflect the status of the roster. No other team in the division even had a winning record during the Sherman years. Being .500 was not all that difficult when 6 games were against the weaker teams in the league before you even looked at the non-divisional games, and you had a QB like Favre in his prime and one of the best runningbacks in the league for 5 years. If you want to really see where the Packers stood, look at their record since 2000 against teams that ended the year with winning records. I've posted it here several times. It was very poor, an indication that inspite of a lot of wins, they were not one of the better teams, merely an average one that played more than their fair share of weak teams, and a team that was aging with few quality replacements inhouse.


This is one area I will wholeheartedly agree regarding Sherman and the transition to TT. It was obvious that after the blown 2001 draft, Sherman used draft picks (two #4s for Glenn, a #2 for Harris, a #2 for the right to move up and get Walker) and FA spending (Big$ for Johnson, KGB, moderate bucks for Green, Tauscher and Clifton) to keep the veteran squad intact/assemble a solid team for one final run with Favre. the 2002 team, which was Superbowl capable, was derailed by injuries, and the 2003 team was derailed by an inexplicable series of unfortunate events all in one game.

In any case, 2002 and 2003 were it - after that you could see the writing on the wall - the team was in rebuilding mode. How Sherman eeked out 10 wins in 2004 was amazing. The squad was depleted of players. TT wants to rebuild mainly through the draft, so it's likely this team won't be playoff solid until 2008, and that's assuming A-rod is a good to above average QB. So far, TT looks below average in pro player moves and even though the prospects for the 2005 draft look grim, it's going to be a year or two more before you know for sure.

[Partial]

I will never forget TT's comment in an interview before the draft in 2005. When asked if anything surprised him in his first few months on the job, the first thing he said was that after studying all the game films from 2004, the roster was not what he expected. My take was that he thought a winning team would have a better roster than what GB had.


Hmmm, now that is very, very interesting to read Patler. Maybe TT does know what he is doing after all!

[crosbiegrad]

I think that TT has tried to improve the WR problem, how could he have predicted that Murphy would have gone down in his first season?!! Sure he may have done a little more this year to improve the situation but didnt he try? We need steady improvement right now and I think Teddy has us going in the right direction

[Packnut]

My whole point is that there really is nothing out there for wide receivers to get the "quick fix" at the position that you criticize TT for not accomplishing. Everyone seems to just sign their own PS guys when the need arises. You can say, "make a trade" but in view of the rest of the roster, is now the time to make that investment? And for who? Someone else's disgruntled player? Mostly teams are willing to trade their 4th receiver, maybe their 3rd for more than he is worth, but that's all. As for TT improving nothing, I disagree.

Are you really suggesting that having Hawk, Hodge, Taylor and yes, even Poppinga from last year isn't a better group of linebackers than Thomas, Lenon, Manning, and the seemingly always injured Diggs (even though I always liked Diggs as a player)? Even if you argue they are no better right now (I would disagree), clearly there is more promise for the future.

Same for the O-line. Colledge, Spitz and Moll show clear promise for the future, and seem to be playing better even now than Klemm, Whitticker and Ruegamer and Wells as a guard last year. I would even argue that Wells is performing better at center than Flanagan last year, even if he is not to the standards of Flanagan of 4 years ago or so. Flanagan was never going to be there again either.

Losing Wahle and Walker were not good thinigs. But Flanagan and Rivera had had their run. They will decline steadily from injuries and age.

Sherman's success in won/loss record did not reflect the status of the roster. No other team in the division even had a winning record during the Sherman years. Being .500 was not all that difficult when 6 games were against the weaker teams in the league before you even looked at the non-divisional games, and you had a QB like Favre in his prime and one of the best runningbacks in the league for 5 years. If you want to really see where the Packers stood, look at their record since 2000 against teams that ended the year with winning records. I've posted it here several times. It was very poor, an indication that inspite of a lot of wins, they were not one of the better teams, merely an average one that played more than their fair share of weak teams, and a team that was aging with few quality replacements inhouse.

This was a mediocre roster in quality, and it finally came home to roost at the same time as salary cap difficulties surfaced. That's why the roster was "blown up". There was very little foundation to build on.

I will never forget TT's comment in an interview before the draft in 2005. When asked if anything surprised him in his first few months on the job, the first thing he said was that after studying all the game films from 2004, the roster was not what he expected. My take was that he thought a winning team would have a better roster than what GB had.

Your arguement all centers around the same theme and that is the "potential" for the future. I'm dealing with facts and the situation as it exists now and on the moves TT has made up to date. I can't argue what will happen in the future or on "potential" because we cannot see into the future. I see guys like Moll and Poppinga making mistakes but yet you hold them up as an example to the future.

As for the cap problems , we can debate that until we're blue in the face. I find it amusing that you TT guys hold onto it as some kind of defense mechanism and your best excuse for where we are today.

However you can't use that excuse when it comes to the horrible moves TT has made. How did the past cap problems have any effect on signing Woodson and Manuel just to name a few?

[FavreChild]

Great post, Bretsky.

Personally, I think TT should have been hired as a draft specialist, not a GM. I feel no need to rehash my assertions about TT right now.

The strategy of "buying time" is a classic rhetorical device to stave off failure. Not necessarily saying that we don't need to be patient. What I am saying, though, is that "being patient" and playing "wait-and-see" does not excuse the blatant mistakes that TT has made. And yes, he is entitled to make mistakes - such as K-Rob, for instance. But at least admit the mistakes. TT is too self-righteous to do so, however.

We are coming off a bye week in WORSE shape than when we entered it!! How is that possible??! More problems were created during the bye week than solved!! This just blows me away, and the responsibility is completely TT's. I don't want to hear any BS about injuries. TT did nothing to prepare for these situations at WR and in the secondary.

Because I moved to another state recently, I have had to make a pact with a fan of another team. He, generously, agrees to watch the Packers with me and, in turn, I agree to watch the Broncos with him, since he is also from another state (guess which one?). But I swear, it is unbelievably striking to watch the Broncos on defense. I keep insisting that they must have 12-13 men on the field. The WORST case scenario is that the offense completes a pass, but there are always THREE Broncos there to make the play. Meanwhile, the contrast is striking when we watch the Packers. My Broncos friend laughs at me when I simply pray that we don't turn over the ball on any given offensive play.

I don't accept that this is an appropriate mindframe for a fan of the Green Bay Packers franchise, the proudest franchise in all of sports.

[Patler]

Your arguement all centers around the same theme and that is the "potential" for the future. I'm dealing with facts and the situation as it exists now and on the moves TT has made up to date. I can't argue what will happen in the future or on "potential" because we cannot see into the future. I see guys like Moll and Poppinga making mistakes but yet you hold them up as an example to the future.

As for the cap problems , we can debate that until we're blue in the face. I find it amusing that you TT guys hold onto it as some kind of defense mechanism and your best excuse for where we are today.

However you can't use that excuse when it comes to the horrible moves TT has made. How did the past cap problems have any effect on signing Woodson and Manuel just to name a few?

No, my argument centers around the facts of the past and where the Packers really were in January 2005. A team that was aging and very few young players on which to build a future. My argument also centers around the facts of the present, not just around potential.

I submit the LBs as a group today ARE better than the group in 2005, or the group in 2004. That has nothing to do with potential. However, since all are very young, they can be EXPECTED to become even better. That is a fact that was missing from Diggs, Navies, Thomas and even Lenon. They were all they ever would be, and it wasn't good enough.

The O-line coming out of 2004 had two guys on the downside of their careers and a guy that didn't want to be there. Yes, it would have been good to have been able to keep Wahle; but I submit that wasn't a reasonable alternative in the Spring of 2005. This year's trio of guards and Wells at center are already playing better than the middle of the O-line last year. That has nothing to do with potential, its the current situation. But again, all are young enough to be EXPECTED to get better, something that is entirely the opposite of what could be expected from Ruegamer, Klemm, Rivera, Flanagan or frankly even Wahle. Not that Wahle needed to improve, he didn't. But age catches everyone. and he will be 30 next March so it really won't be all that many years before he will start to decline as well. That's the reality of pro sports. The middle of the O-line as a whole was an area where replacements were needed. Even now is not too soon to be looking for tackles. Clifton and Tauscher are not that far from the inevitable downsides of their career either. SO you have to look not just for backups, but for potential starters as well.

You make a big deal out of the signings of Manual or Woodson. At 10 million for 5 years Manual is barely over the average salary for the 53 man roster. His was not a big money signing. Woodson was signed with available cap space for this year, with minimal impact on future caps. If either or both are released in a year or two, it will hurt nothing. If you can't get the players you want for whatever reason. it is wise to sign those you can to deals that won't hamstring you from FA dealings in future years.

The signing of Kampman and Pickett to front loaded contracts was similarly wise. It ensures more flexibility in the future.

A team doesn't always interest a player they want, and there may not be players you want when you first have the cap space to get them. The smart thing is to do what you can in a way to not harm the future. GB did that very well this year.

Once the base of the roster improves, then will be the time for a big FA splash if possible.

[Patler]

But at least admit the mistakes. TT is too self-righteous to do so, however.

We are coming off a bye week in WORSE shape than when we entered it!! How is that possible??! More problems were created during the bye week than solved!! This just blows me away, and the responsibility is completely TT's. I don't want to hear any BS about injuries. TT did nothing to prepare for these situations at WR and in the secondary.



If TT is too self-righteous to admit mistakes, than over the off-season why did he come right out and say that he failed to do a good enough job in replacing the guards? At least give him credit for admitting his draft mistakes by releasing players like Bragg and Cory Rodgers in their first camps, and Hawkins after only one year. He admits he was wrong about players by his actions. Do you think TT would have kept a second punter just because he was a high draft pick?

How are we in worse shape coming out of the bye weak than going into it? The only change was Robinson. Ferguson was hurt going into it. Woodson was hurt going into it, and may be able to play. Driver is healthier. Green is better. Spitz will have had some solid practices to help shake off the rust.

Maybe we should at least let Dendy and Francies play a little before concluding they will be failures. Is Dendy any less likely to succeed just because he wasn't drafted than Hawkins who never even played college football to any extent? Is Francies any less likely to succeed just because he wasn't drafted than Driver who wasn't drafted until the 7th round?

People make too big of a deal about losing Robinson, as if he was an integral part of the offense. He wasn't.

The Packers may be different coming out of the bye. I'm not sure they are "worse".

[FavreChild]

If TT is too self-righteous to admit mistakes, than over the off-season why did he come right out and say that he failed to do a good enough job in replacing the guards?

One situation has nothing to do with the other.

I am not refusing to give TT any credit.

But the current situation is inexcusable. And I predict we *will* hear excuses.

Hopefully we'll pull out a win, anyway. With no thanks to TT.

[SD GB fan]

If TT is too self-righteous to admit mistakes, than over the off-season why did he come right out and say that he failed to do a good enough job in replacing the guards?

One situation has nothing to do with the other.

I am not refusing to give TT any credit.

But the current situation is inexcusable. And I predict we *will* hear excuses.

Hopefully we'll pull out a win, anyway. With no thanks to TT.

so if we win, its not cos of TT
and if we lose, its his fault

a bit tough to come out as a successful GM huh?

[FavreChild]

Yup, pretty much. :mrgreen:

But it is true. If we win tomorrow (today), it will be in spite of TT, I predict.

[FavreChild]

Sorry to say - because truly, I am not happy about it - but the "patience" tactic is nothing but a rhetorical strategy. Especially when it was plainly known that the secondary was a weakness! And I have no problem with David Martin filling in at WR, or practice squad folks getting promoted, but again I do not want to hear any excuses should the passing game suffer. Two weeks to get the ship in order. That *is* a management repsonsibility.

I hope everything works out well and that we crush the Dolphins. That would be awesome!! I just can't help but believe in Miami's incompetence more than our own proficiency, unfortunately.

[Patler]

Sorry to say - because truly, I am not happy about it - but the "patience" tactic is nothing but a rhetorical strategy. Especially when it was plainly known that the secondary was a weakness! And I have no problem with David Martin filling in at WR, or practice squad folks getting promoted, but again I do not want to hear any excuses should the passing game suffer. Two weeks to get the ship in order. That *is* a management repsonsibility.

I hope everything works out well and that we crush the Dolphins. That would be awesome!! I just can't help but believe in Miami's incompetence more than our own proficiency, unfortunately.

Look at what other teams did for WRs the last two weeks. There is nothing out there to get. Once the season starts, you are pretty much stuck with what you have on your roster and the practice squad.

What was he supposed to do "to get the ship in order"? Don't just say "get someone". Who?

And as I tried to point out, maybe he has with Dendy, Bush, Francies, etc. One or two might surprise us. Not a certainty, or even a high probability, but we really don't know yet.

[Patler]

But the current situation is inexcusable. And I predict we *will* hear excuses.
.

What is "inexcusable"?

WR? - he lost a good one because of attitude (Walker) and a high draft pick to injury (Murphy). You can blame TT for one if you want (I disagree). He brought 12 into camp, including two high draft picks this year, some veteran free agents, some hold over camp and practice squad guys from last year and some intriguing undrafted rookies. It's not like he did nothing.

Same for DBs. He signed a corner and a safety free agent, he drafted a corner relatively high and a safety, he had 16 rostered in the off season and brought 14 into camp. He didn't like what he saw, so after the final cuts he signed two last cuts from other teams. At this point we don't know if Bush, Dendy, Blackmon, Culver or Peprah can play or not. Who knows, maybe he has "hit" on one or two of them.

[Partial]

Patler, you should be an analyst for a major TV network. You form just about the most reasonable and rational arguments of any I have ever read.

[Patler]

Thanks Partial!

[vince]

Patler, you should be an analyst for a major TV network. You form just about the most reasonable and rational arguments of any I have ever read.
Couldn't agree more. I feel like the monkey below, but in all seriousness, there is nowhere a Packer fan can find the superior knowledge foundation and stat work you bring to us all. Sound, supported arguments... Patler, here's hoping you don't ever go away. Your contributions to this board are significant. Thank you for making them.

http://www.mapaubingo.com/images/monkey3.jpg

[mraynrand]

WR? - he lost a good one because of attitude (Walker)

Well, I think he really lost Walker due to adhering to a particular philosophy. He could have 're-signed' Walker in the 2004 -2005 off season, but that would have meant re-working a five year contract two years early and allowing a guy with about a year and a half of production set the standard for the team (and this assumes that Walker wanted to stay, even with more money - there's no difinitive proof that he would have signed a new deal). Most, if not all, teams don't re-negotiate contracts this early.

The opposing view is that teams with great players eagerly re-up to make sure they lock them in, but this is seems more typical for QBs than wide outs. This was debated ad nauseum, but comes down to this - would there have been any negative fall-out from signing Walker to a new contract in 2004. I don't know the answer.

It does seem as though the NFL standard is for the 'team of origin' not to give in to player demands. Look at some notables: Johnson and McCardell in Tampa, Terry Glenn and Branch in NE, McKenzie and Walker in GB, TO everywhere he plays, etc. One thing seems pretty clear. At some point, you determine that a guy isn't worth what he thinks he is and/or he's become such a problem he isn't worth keeping, and you have to move on.

Still, you can't lose one or more of your best players every year and expect to compete. The loss of McKenzie, Wahle, and Walker in successive years (actually they 'lost' Walker two years in a row - once to injury and once to contract dispute) has had a big impact on this team.

[Patler]

Still, you can't lose one or more of your best players every year and expect to compete. The loss of McKenzie, Wahle, and Walker in successive years (actually they 'lost' Walker two years in a row - once to injury and once to contract dispute) has had a big impact on this team.

You are right, that makes it difficult, but there was a time GB survived those types of losses. You have to draft well and have replacements on board.

Packer starters and significant backups lost as FAs under Wolf:

'93 - Chuck Cecil, Tootie Robbins
'94 - Tony Bennett, Doug Wedell
'95 - Bryce Paup, Joe Sims, Ed West, Darrell Thompson, Tim Hauk, Matt Brock.
'96 - Harry Galbreath, John Jurkovic, Fred Strickland
'97 - Desmond Howard
'98 - Aaron Taylor, Doug Evans, Craig Hentrich, Eugene Robinson, Gabe Wilkins, Edgar Bennett
'99 - Adam Timmerman, Travis Jervey, Bob Kuberski, Sean Landeta, Lamont Hollinquest, Darick Holmes
2000 - Keith McKenzie, Vaughn Booker
2001 - Ross Verba

Lots of All Pros in that group, guys who were close, and others that were key contributors to the Packers. A solid roster survives those types of player losses year after year by drafting well and having replacements like Teague, Sims for Robbins, Johnny Holland, Wayne Simmons, Rivera, Wahle, Tauscher, Clifton, etc.

[Patler]

Patler, you should be an analyst for a major TV network. You form just about the most reasonable and rational arguments of any I have ever read.
Couldn't agree more. I feel like the monkey below, but in all seriousness, there is nowhere a Packer fan can find the superior knowledge foundation and stat work you bring to us all. Sound, supported arguments... Patler, here's hoping you don't ever go away. Your contributions to this board are significant. Thank you for making them.

You people are very kind with your compliments. You also are an extremely knowledgeable group, which keeps everyone on their toes. I find myself verifying everything I write before hitting "submit" because if I don't and make a mistake, someone always catches it! This really is a very fine board for Packer discussion because of all of its members.

[MJZiggy]

I think that TT has tried to improve the WR problem, how could he have predicted that Murphy would have gone down in his first season?!! Sure he may have done a little more this year to improve the situation but didnt he try? We need steady improvement right now and I think Teddy has us going in the right direction

Ok, so I'm two days late, but welcome to the forum. Admittedly it can be tough to get a word in edgewise in an argument about TT, but I do agree with you here. If drafting Murphy who would have been good and everyone knows it and Jennings who is good in back-to-back years, you can't say he hasn't done ANYTHING, just because he didn't do what you wanted him to. Imagine how our WR corps would look if Murphy had stayed healthy and continued the start he had with us.

[mraynrand]

Still, you can't lose one or more of your best players every year and expect to compete. The loss of McKenzie, Wahle, and Walker in successive years (actually they 'lost' Walker two years in a row - once to injury and once to contract dispute) has had a big impact on this team.

You are right, that makes it difficult, but there was a time GB survived those types of losses. You have to draft well and have replacements on board.

Packer starters and significant backups lost as FAs under Wolf:

'93 - Chuck Cecil, Tootie Robbins
'94 - Tony Bennett, Doug Wedell
'95 - Bryce Paup, Joe Sims, Ed West, Darrell Thompson, Tim Hauk, Matt Brock.
'96 - Harry Galbreath, John Jurkovic, Fred Strickland
'97 - Desmond Howard
'98 - Aaron Taylor, Doug Evans, Craig Hentrich, Eugene Robinson, Gabe Wilkins, Edgar Bennett
'99 - Adam Timmerman, Travis Jervey, Bob Kuberski, Sean Landeta, Lamont Hollinquest, Darick Holmes
2000 - Keith McKenzie, Vaughn Booker
2001 - Ross Verba

Lots of All Pros in that group, guys who were close, and others that were key contributors to the Packers. A solid roster survives those types of player losses year after year by drafting well and having replacements like Teague, Sims for Robbins, Johnny Holland, Wayne Simmons, Rivera, Wahle, Tauscher, Clifton, etc.

When they left the Packers, which of these guys were all-pro? Was any guy other than Timmerman actually one of the best three at his position in the conference? I guess you'd miss Bennett, Paup, and Timmerman. Ed West? Eugene Robinson? Yeech. I'm talking best players on your team. Still, your right. You have to have some depth to compensate for loss of players. The 2001 and 2004 drafts were awful, 2003 was marginal and 2002 was good. That's not enough.

[Patler]

Still, you can't lose one or more of your best players every year and expect to compete. The loss of McKenzie, Wahle, and Walker in successive years (actually they 'lost' Walker two years in a row - once to injury and once to contract dispute) has had a big impact on this team.

You are right, that makes it difficult, but there was a time GB survived those types of losses. You have to draft well and have replacements on board.

Packer starters and significant backups lost as FAs under Wolf:

'93 - Chuck Cecil, Tootie Robbins
'94 - Tony Bennett, Doug Wedell
'95 - Bryce Paup, Joe Sims, Ed West, Darrell Thompson, Tim Hauk, Matt Brock.
'96 - Harry Galbreath, John Jurkovic, Fred Strickland
'97 - Desmond Howard
'98 - Aaron Taylor, Doug Evans, Craig Hentrich, Eugene Robinson, Gabe Wilkins, Edgar Bennett
'99 - Adam Timmerman, Travis Jervey, Bob Kuberski, Sean Landeta, Lamont Hollinquest, Darick Holmes
2000 - Keith McKenzie, Vaughn Booker
2001 - Ross Verba

Lots of All Pros in that group, guys who were close, and others that were key contributors to the Packers. A solid roster survives those types of player losses year after year by drafting well and having replacements like Teague, Sims for Robbins, Johnny Holland, Wayne Simmons, Rivera, Wahle, Tauscher, Clifton, etc.

When they left the Packers, which of these guys were all-pro? Was any guy other than Timmerman actually one of the best three at his position in the conference? I guess you'd miss Bennett, Paup, and Timmerman. Ed West? Eugene Robinson? Yeech. I'm talking best players on your team. Still, your right. You have to have some depth to compensate for loss of players. The 2001 and 2004 drafts were awful, 2003 was marginal and 2002 was good. That's not enough.

Well for that matter, when he left Wahle had not been an all pro or pro bowl player yet. As you know, there are many "All-Pro" lists, but of the above, the ones who had made at least one while a Packer include:
Cecil
Paup
Howard
Robinson
Evans
Hentrich
Jervey (for Special Teams)

Pro Bowl participants while Packers include:
Cecil
Paup
Jervey

The year after he left, Paup became NFL Defensive Player of the year, and went to numerous Pro Bowls. Timmerman too. Many felt that Bennett and Evans deserved to go to the Pro bowl, but didn't.

You may not like Ed West, but he was a starter for a lot of years and is still #18 on the all-time Packer list for number of receptions. The only tight end in Packer history with more receptions was Paul Coffman. Plus, West was an exceptional blocker. My list was intended to include starters who were lost and significant backups. Many of those were as significant as Wahle and Walker, and the overall numbers were much higher.

[swede]

Sorry Bretsky, but I'm siding with Patler.

My grandpa had a good old house on a sh*tty foundation. Twenty years ago he jacked the thing up and built a new foundation under it. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. Recently, after funding allowed, he completely redid the upper portion of the house on top of the newer, sturdier foundation.

Favre and Driver won't be here forever, but they pretty much won that game yesterday imo. (Good ol' house)

And those young offensive linemen seem to be getting the ZBS, though pass protection needs work. The young linebackers played well also--so I have to apologize to Popinga and Barnett for not loving them all the time. (New foundation)

It strikes me as unrealistic that, in a competitive league of 32 teams, a fan can't give a little patience to the process. TT has been finding young players to complement our productive veterans now. Still to come are new players that will become the foundation of this team's future. Staying on TT's bandwagon has been bumpy for me, but I haven't fallen off yet.

Mark your calendars for 2009 oh disbelieving ones. We'll either have a playoff team or a new GM.

And for goodness sake get off of Wahle and Walker. Talk about beating a dead horse. THEY DIDN'T WANT TO BE HERE OR THEY'D BE HERE!

p.s. After yesterday's game I sure wish Ahman Green was 26 again.

[Bretsky]

RANDOM THOUGHTS ON THIS SATURDAY

But knowing of Robinson's probable suspension before the trade deadline and then Fergy's injury, we heard little of TT's efforts to bring in a quality WR. Did he try ? I'd hope so, but I'm starting to be more of a doubter.

And is Brewster and Bookman really the best out there ? Maybe we can find the next flavor of the day after our Taco like experiment last year; but it's doubtful. An effort for Willie Ponder would have looked real nice now. Tyrone Calico anyone ?

B

If Ponder or Calico are so interesting, how come in just the last two weeks the following teams filled WR needs by doing the following:

Bengals put a WR on IR, signed Glenn Holt from their practice squad.
Texans signed David Anderson from their practice squad.
Tampa signed Chad Lucas.
Miami released a WR, signed Vick from their practice squad.
Detroit signed Devale Ellis from their practice squad.
Arizona signed Carlyle Holiday from their practice squad.
MN releasedMann and signed Bethel Johnson.
N.E. signed Jabar Gaffney.

In just two weeks covering transactions before and after the Packers signed Francies eight other teams passed on these guys, in spite of making moves involving wide receivers. You can ignore Miami's move involving Vick if you want, its hard to say what all is behind that, but that still leaves 7 others.

I have no great explanation on Calico; maybe he's an attitude problem.

Nobody took a shot at Ponder because he was snatched up right away. I was referring to the call of a couple people in here to grab him right away after the final countdown. TT didn't take a shot. Surprised me. He's with Holmy. Still a very very good special teams guy and return man.

B

[Bretsky]

Sorry Bretsky, but I'm siding with Patler.

My grandpa had a good old house on a sh*tty foundation. Twenty years ago he jacked the thing up and built a new foundation under it. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. Recently, after funding allowed, he completely redid the upper portion of the house on top of the newer, sturdier foundation.

Favre and Driver won't be here forever, but they pretty much won that game yesterday imo. (Good ol' house)

And those young offensive linemen seem to be getting the ZBS, though pass protection needs work. The young linebackers played well also--so I have to apologize to Popinga and Barnett for not loving them all the time. (New foundation)

It strikes me as unrealistic that, in a competitive league of 32 teams, a fan can't give a little patience to the process. TT has been finding young players to complement our productive veterans now. Still to come are new players that will become the foundation of this team's future. Staying on TT's bandwagon has been bumpy for me, but I haven't fallen off yet.

Mark your calendars for 2009 oh disbelieving ones. We'll either have a playoff team or a new GM.

And for goodness sake get off of Wahle and Walker. Talk about beating a dead horse. THEY DIDN'T WANT TO BE HERE OR THEY'D BE HERE!

p.s. After yesterday's game I sure wish Ahman Green was 26 again.


I'm not sure Patler and I completely disagree here; I'm not completely on or off the TT wagon.

I just think TT needs to do a better job utilizing ALL avenues........free agency, trades, and the draft. I think Patler would agree, but grade TT a heck of a lot higher overall then I would now.

B

[vince]

Sorry Bretsky, but I'm siding with Patler.

My grandpa had a good old house on a sh*tty foundation. Twenty years ago he jacked the thing up and built a new foundation under it. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. Recently, after funding allowed, he completely redid the upper portion of the house on top of the newer, sturdier foundation.

Favre and Driver won't be here forever, but they pretty much won that game yesterday imo. (Good ol' house)

And those young offensive linemen seem to be getting the ZBS, though pass protection needs work. The young linebackers played well also--so I have to apologize to Popinga and Barnett for not loving them all the time. (New foundation)

It strikes me as unrealistic that, in a competitive league of 32 teams, a fan can't give a little patience to the process. TT has been finding young players to complement our productive veterans now. Still to come are new players that will become the foundation of this team's future. Staying on TT's bandwagon has been bumpy for me, but I haven't fallen off yet.

Mark your calendars for 2009 oh disbelieving ones. We'll either have a playoff team or a new GM.

And for goodness sake get off of Wahle and Walker. Talk about beating a dead horse. THEY DIDN'T WANT TO BE HERE OR THEY'D BE HERE!

p.s. After yesterday's game I sure wish Ahman Green was 26 again.


I'm not sure Patler and I completely disagree here; I'm not completely on or off the TT wagon.

I just think TT needs to do a better job utilizing ALL avenues........free agency, trades, and the draft. I think Patler would agree, but grade TT a heck of a lot higher overall then I would now.

B
I have no doubt that he will, B, at the right time. The wrong time to go out and sign high-priced free agents is when 1) you're in cap hell, as the team was in '05, and 2) you have a brand new coaching staff that will be implementing new systems and the team lacks the depth to get to an elite level in the first place. Doing so at that time perpetuates your salary cap problems, and just gets the team another win or two.

Free agent signings appease the fans, because they show that you're doing something, but when they turn out like Joe Johnson, they kill you.

To see how to build a consistent winner, take a look at two franchises who take opposite approaches and see which one has been more successful over the last decade.

1) Pittsburgh
2) Washington

I don't advocate for being as INACTIVE in free agency as Pittsburgh is year in and year out, but until the Packers have learned more about who they are and get to the point where plugging 3 or 4 holes will get them to elite status, I like the fact that they team errs on the side of maintaining the cap flexibility to act in the best interests of the team, rather than having no flexibility, other than to mortgage the future, to make the improvements that need to be made.

This franchise is in a VERY GOOD position for the future. It's getting better and better on the field, and is definitely on the rise. That turnaround has occurred pretty quickly from where it was just a year ago.