Starting to appreciate what Sherman did for GB?

[PackerBlues]

Ok, only time will tell just how much we should or should not have appreciated Shermans time in GB as a coach and GM. I for one, have still not jumped on the TT bandwagon, and I am not about to any time soon. I have not seen enough improvements to this team to warrant jumping on his bandwagon.
In my opinion, Sherman had his hands full keeping the team competitive while patching things as he went along. I keep reading peoples arguments about Joe Johnson......very weak arguments. Everyone got a hard-on for that signing. It was a risk that did not work, but nobody knew it at the time! Then we have people still cryin about using a 3rd round pick on a punter.......ok, I was one of em.....but, I still think that was a move that was made due to salary cap problems more than anything. How much would a reciever or O-lineman have held out for? Draftin the punter kinda made sense in a screwy kinda way, when you take it in the context of how Sherman was going about holding the team together. He had said that he was going to lose Wahle or Rivera, but not both and that he might lose Sharper if he wanted to much money. He was straight up with everyone, and said what he wanted to do. (unlike TT)
Before you all start bashing me for sticking up for Sherman, consider this simple fact......GB consistently had winning records under Sherman. He held the team together by patching holes as he went along, and for the most part it worked. Yes he had salary cap issues and it was tight, but we were winning, and in the end isnt that what really counted?
As opposed to TT and the wrecking ball he dropped on Titletown. Yay, we have cap room now.........but what year do you think we will see the playoffs again? Last year was pathetic, and the only fun part about this year is Favre. The biggest argument for TT........"we are building for the future"........whatever. Until the future arrives we have just taken the place of the Cincinnati Bungles as the joke of the NFL.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d29/trickyblue/TT.jpg

[billy_oliver880]

So you honestly beleive we were going to stay on top forever? We were losing our core group of players and not getting them rebuilt. I think you would have seen the same with sherman. Could have been worse.

[PackerBlues]

ya.......The same thing might have happened with Sherman, I will agree with that. But saying that it could have been worse??? How much worse would it have to get to be worse than it is now???

[The Leaper]

I don't appreciate anything.

Sherman the coach had inherited a roster left by Ron Wolf that I could've coached to the playoffs...especially considering the incredibly sorry state of the NFC North during Sherman's tenure.

Sherman the GM wasted the final half of Favre career. Despite the fact that he was given a roster full of great talent, and only needed to add a couple pieces to get over the top...Sherman consistently failed to add ANYTHING of value. Javon Walker was his best pickup...and he gave us ONE...repeat ONE...great season. 4 out of 5 additions to the roster by Sherman were MISERABLE FAILURES.

Anyone even trying to defend Sherman is a fool. The guy might have had the greatest intentions. The guy might have gave 110%. Bottom line is Sherman wasted the latter half of one of the greatest QBs ever by constantly taking stupid risks in the draft and procuring very little talent through free agency.

A bunch of 12-4 seasons...ending in a bunch of playoff losses on your home turf...is not my idea of something I appreciate.

[Lurker64]

In a word: No.

In several more words: I still resent the fact that Sherman inherited a good situation and made a mess of it.

[gbpackfan]

I just don't get how you can say you don't see any improvement in this team. I know, they are not a Super Bowl contender, but that will come. The LB's are better, the O line is better then last year and Greg Jennings is quite a find. There is def. improvement. TT's draft picks are much better then Sherman's were.

[PackerBlues]

12-4 records are unappreciated because they ened in losses in the playoffs? WOW! Last year ended at 4-12, and if you are going to tell me that you liked that better.......whatever.

This team is improved? Maybe. Maybe we can shoot for the moon and go 5-11 this year.

[gbpackfan]

Cry some more. That helps. Teams have ups and downs, that is a fact of life in the NFL. If they are 4-12, 5-11 next season, then I'll grab a pitch fork and stand next to you.

[HarveyWallbangers]

It's not like Sherman went 12-4 every year. He did go one and out nearly every year in the playoffs though. I have nothing against Sherman as a person and possibly not as a coach, but I hold two things against him: 1) not going for it on 4th and 1 in the playoff game vs. Philly in their territory with the best rushing offense in the league against a poor run defense (and with a pretty mediocre defense of his own), and 2) his horrible GM moves. He was in over his head as GM/coach.

[billy_oliver880]

12-4 records are unappreciated because they ened in losses in the playoffs? WOW! Last year ended at 4-12, and if you are going to tell me that you liked that better.......whatever.

This team is improved? Maybe. Maybe we can shoot for the moon and go 5-11 this year.

So you are trying to tell me with Sherman's track record of drafting that we were going to stay on top forever. Did you look at the roster when he was stripped of his gm duties? We didn't have a solid core. Who cares if the record has dropped off man. It was going to happen sooner or later. We are building up a good group of youngsters. Believe it or not.

[The Leaper]

12-4 records are unappreciated because they ened in losses in the playoffs? WOW! Last year ended at 4-12, and if you are going to tell me that you liked that better.......whatever.

I do like it better.

We got AJ Hawk because of it. We got Greg Jennings because of it. We got Colledge, Spitz, Hodge and Moll because of it.

Maybe if Sherman had gone 4-12 once or twice, he would've been able to read enough of Mel Kiper's mock to actually draft a starting quality player for once.

I'll take a 4-12 season that produces a wealth of young talent in the draft ANY DAY over a 12-4 season produced by smoke and mirrors in a division of patsies, which is exposed for what it is in the playoffs...and sticks us so low in the draft that we have to hope to land an impact player.

Our franchise was dominant in Lambeau for decades in the postseason. Sherman ruined it.

And you fawn desperate hot man-love for him still? Ridiculous.

[FavreChild]

It's not like Sherman went 12-4 every year. He did go one and out nearly every year in the playoffs though. I have nothing against Sherman as a person and possibly not as a coach, but I hold two things against him: 1) not going for it on 4th and 1 in the playoff game vs. Philly in their territory with the best rushing offense in the league against a poor run defense (and with a pretty mediocre defense of his own), and 2) his horrible GM moves. He was in over his head as GM/coach.

Pretty much sums it up for me, too.

I feel Sherman got a raw deal as far as his coaching goes and his relationship with the players. Most of the attacks against Sherman are emotional, unfair, and have no merit - other than the two specific critiques Harvey states.

Sherman will be a head coach again somewhere, and will probably do a nice job. I don't much understand why people feel the need to keep attacking Sherman, although I suppose I can understand that people want to believe that the right decision was made in firing him.

[FritzDontBlitz]

ya.......The same thing might have happened with Sherman, I will agree with that. But saying that it could have been worse??? How much worse would it have to get to be worse than it is now???

it can always be worse, my friend. had we let sherman continue as gm he would have taken a bust at #5 and then traded away half the rest of his picks to pick up two marginal players.

a team hurting for 5 or 6 fresh contributors in the offseason would have got maybe one, the rest of the picks would have been m2's legendary "projects" (think robert ferguson) who would have sat on the roster for years before we had to dump them.

wait until tt has a chance to clean up sherman's mess, then you'll be able to see the future....

[retailguy]

Welcome to the forum Packer Blues. Don't let the "anti Sherman" crowd drive you away. there are a lot of us here who liked sherman as a coach but moreso as a person.

As to all the bashing - consider the source. If some of these guys judged their own job performance by the same criteria they judge Sherman they'd almost all be hopelessly unemployed.

No coach we've ever had worked HARDER than Sherman. Sherman just didn't win the big one. If he had, this would be all water under the bridge. If people spent more time understanding what the word "perspective" meant, you'd be able to have a more substantive debate.

Jury is still out on TT & M3. To be fair we must give them more time, however, it is NO FUN watching them lose. I've been around following the team since the Bengston years and you gotta admit - even at 4-12 it was still better than the 70's and most of the 80's.... Praise God for that.

Anyhow, WELCOME to the forum. We're glad you're here!

[PackerBlues]

Try to start a post on Looking back on what Sherman did for GB, and I get TT cheerleaders and ignorant bashing. " desperate hot man-love " wow, impressive.
Then we have the guys that can not only see the future, but also know what would have happened if this had happened or if that had happened. Any of you chumps have some lottery numbers you want to share with the rest of us? :crazy:

[SD GB fan]

hey uhh who cares? none of this matters, just watch the game and see if the packers improve or not. we are on the same side arent we?

[FavreChild]

PackerBlues - you do have to consider that the anti-Sherman people are most likely to react strongly to your post. Just on psychological reasoning alone, a lot of people felt some sort of satisfaction from Sherman getting canned. Personally, I didn't agree with Sherman's firing, but I do understand that people wanted some "action."

So...don't get discouraged by the Sherman-haters. :cool:

That's all I'm sayin'. :mrgreen:

[billy_oliver880]

Try to start a post on Looking back on what Sherman did for GB, and I get TT cheerleaders and ignorant bashing. " desperate hot man-love " wow, impressive.
Then we have the guys that can not only see the future, but also know what would have happened if this had happened or if that had happened. Any of you chumps have some lottery numbers you want to share with the rest of us? :crazy:

Sherman was a good coach but a lousy gm. So I am guessing you wanted TT to blow all our cap on vets in free agency for the chance to make it to the top again?

[PackerBlues]

Thanks Retailguy. Much appreciated. Heh heh.......remember when the best reason to watch the Packers was to watch the hits by Chuck Cecil? Man, what I wouldnt give to at least have a player like that on our defense. That would be something that you could call an improvement.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Try to start a post on Looking back on what Sherman did for GB, and I get TT cheerleaders and ignorant bashing.

You didn't just start a post looking back on Sherman. If you had done just that, you might have gotten a different response. You also bashed Thompson. Personally, I'm in the middle on both guys. Sherman did some good things as coach. If you think Sherman did a good job as GM, you're nuts or you're Tank (which isn't mutually exclusive). If you think Thompson can be judged at this point (especially after the roster he inherited), you are nuts also. I think Thompson has made mistakes, but I see a lot of young guys that might turn this ship around. I'll wait until the end of next year before judging him.

[The Leaper]

I'm not a Sherman hater...but the facts are the facts.

Few coaches get blessed with a roster of talent like he had.

Few coaches get blessed with a division of misfits like the NFC North during his tenure.

Few coaches are blessed with one of the top QBs to ever play the game in the twilight of his prime.

And Sherman NEVER ONCE reached an NFC title game...let alone a Super Bowl.

He was a poor coach. He was a horrific GM.

I don't care how nice of a guy he was, or how many old ladies he helped across the street.

And don't babble on and on about comparing my job to Sherman's job. I don't earn $3M a year, especially for getting fired when I do a lousy job. There is no comparison. To whom much is given, much is required. Sherman fell woefully short.

That is just the bottom line.

[The Leaper]

Try to start a post on Looking back on what Sherman did for GB, and I get TT cheerleaders and ignorant bashing. " desperate hot man-love " wow, impressive.

Impressive?

Like your stupid little TT picture?

You are a waste of bandwidth. Honestly. I don't know how else to describe someone who is going to fish for exactly what he got...then act like he was wasn't holding the club after Nancy Kerrigan got popped.

[PackerBlues]

Awwwwww poor leaper. Did my stupid little picture of TT offend you?

Do you fawn desperate hot man-love for him? Just wondering?

[PackerTimer]

Awwwwww poor leaper. Did my stupid little picture of TT offend you?

the stupidity is astounding. you started a thread to rip on TT and praise sherman and then whine that TT supporters slam you. and then when Leaper points this out you come back with that. WOW. how sure are we that this isn't tank?

[The Leaper]

That's your best comeback? Ouch.

Sherman was a great guy. I think he did everything he could to better the team. Unfortunately, he was an incompetant GM and a lousy coach. He often looked like he was unsure of what to do...a point made all too clear in the Philly debacle.

I'm sorry...but trying to defend Sherman's record is virtually impossible IMO. I wish him the best...but I'm thankful he's not in Green Bay anymore.

Bottom line...he was fired and there were NUMEROUS openings in the NFL and few experienced options available. Did he get a job? If he was so good as a coach, as you suggest, he would've gotten a job.

[billy_oliver880]

Try to start a post on Looking back on what Sherman did for GB, and I get TT cheerleaders and ignorant bashing. " desperate hot man-love " wow, impressive.

Impressive?

Like your stupid little TT picture?

You are a waste of bandwidth. Honestly. I don't know how else to describe someone who is going to fish for exactly what he got...then act like he was wasn't holding the club after Nancy Kerrigan got popped.

He's a closet lion's fan. :wink:

[pacfan]

Then we have people still cryin about using a 3rd round pick on a punter.......ok, I was one of em.....but, I still think that was a move that was made due to salary cap problems more than anything.

This is fucking hilarious......

[PackerTimer]

i also found that funny. drafting a punter (trading up to draft said punter) because you can't afford anybody better. and he wasn't even a good punter. how is this an effective argument in defense of the GM who did it?

[The Leaper]

Drafting a punter in the 3rd round is FAR MORE EXPENSIVE than picking up a couple as undrafted FAs and letting them battle it out.

It had NOTHING to do with the salary cap...and everything to do with Sherman being a piss poor GM.

I enjoy it when nutcases like this make the arguments AGAINST their own viewpoint. Highly enjoyable reading.

[Scott Campbell]

Ok, only time will tell just how much we should or should not have appreciated Shermans time in GB as a coach and GM.


Time, as in nap time?

http://img483.imageshack.us/img483/396/motivator4231896zt9.jpg

[GBRulz]

HA! I haven't seen that one, SC!!! Love it

[PackerTimer]

Time, as in nap time?

:lol:

thanks for the laugh. that joke will never get old.

[The Leaper]

Do we get to pick our own carpet remnant for nap time?

I bet Sherman had a few nap times during his drafts too. He impresses me as one of those guys who would only sleep on the scratchiest berber pads he could find.

:cool:

[VegasPackFan]

Why does it seem that Shermy apologists usually lack reasoning skills?

He was a good guy with good intentions, so I wont ever bash the guy personally. But he was SLOWLY killing this team. We were on a slow but sure decline. Kind of like the frog in the water as the heat slowly gets turned up. The frog doesnt even notice that soon he is cooking in boiling water. That was us.

Sherman lacked the gutsy attitude that it takes to make it in a macho sport like football. He just lacked killer instinct. The current regime is an improvement in every way.

[GrnBay007]

He just lacked killer instinct.

Hey now, we did see that killer instinct that time he wanted a piece of Warren Sapp. :smack:

:razz:

[Iron Mike]

He just lacked killer instinct.

Hey now, we did see that killer instinct that time he wanted a piece of Warren Sapp. :smack:

:razz:

Heh heh.......
http://media.scout.com/Media/Other/428161_sapp_sherman.JPG

[Sparkey]

Sherman showed, again, why the majority of the time it is not a good idea to give a guy both the Head Coach and GM titles.

Reason being, their goals are not always the same and sometimes you need too take a slight step back to take a large step forward.

[PackerBlues]

I thought that was great the way Sherman got in Sapps face. I thought the concern he showed for Clifton really showed a lot of character


Then I read this on JSonline this morning.


"But general manager Ted Thompson said emphatically that he wanted Ferguson back next season.

"Absolutely not, no" Thompson said when asked if the Packers were considering an injury settlement. "We want Robert with us. We want him to be a Packer. This doesn't have anything to do with any history he's had in the past and any injury he's had. This is just a bad-luck injury. It's just part of the price you pay in the National Football League."


I think that also shows character and class........if what TT is saying is true. I have read in another post about how Ferguson is the mirror image on offense to what Ahmad Carroll was to the defense. I kinda had to agree. I am pretty sure that Chatman had very comparable numbers to Fergy in his last year with the Pack. (catches, yards, TD's) and TT had no problem shipping him down the road (not that I minded.....I thought he was to small).
So, he has a chance to Dump Fergy with an injury settlement, and instead shows class in allowing Fergy to get healed up before he cuts his ass (with any luck).

[Packnut]

Sherman's coaching career will always be defined by the Philly game. He blew it and has no one to blame but himself. Games like that seperate the mediocre from the great.

[Bossman641]

Sherman was a decent coach, bad GM. I would have liked to see him paired with a GM for more than one season to see what they could have done.

SHERMAN IS GONE THOUGH. GET OVER IT.

Some people seem to get enjoyment out of tearing Sherman down....over and over again.

[mraynrand]

Why does it seem that Shermy apologists usually lack reasoning skills?

He was a good guy with good intentions, so I wont ever bash the guy personally. But he was SLOWLY killing this team.

Actually, I find that most people who HATE Shermy lack reasoning skills. They typically focus on the 4th and one, the #3 for Sander and giving money to KGB and Joe Johnson.

The truth is that Sherman wasn't slowly killing the team, he was doing it very rapidly. It should be obvious that Sherman was going for broke trying to win one last time with an aging QB and roster.

Sherman walked into GB with a sorry beat up veteran squad and one final fantastic GM year from Wolf. Sherman had crap along the D-line (Theirry, Dotson, Brown, Holliday. Maryland was past his prime but was brought in to replace the ever expanding Brown, and KGB was a rook), O-line (Verba, Winters, Dotson(played two games) and two rookies, LB crew (Bernardo Harris and A beat up Brian Williams were 'the best' on this crew, WR (Schroeder - marginal and Freeman - washed up, led this group) and RB (Levens was washed up, Hendo still competent, Green the FA aquisition) when he arrived. To say that the squad that Sherman inhereted 'was loaded with talent' is just a bunch of crap.

There will always be an argument about what is the most important factor between guys drafted being talented versus a coach bringing out that talent - so I give equal credit to Wolf and Sherman for drafting, aquiring, developing and using the talents of Clifton, Tauscher, KGB, Franks, and Green. Wolfs' 1999 and 2001 drafts were so-so and pretty crappy, so Sherman pretty much got the pre-1999 hold-overs, the 2000 guys, plus McKenzie, Driver, and Martin.

Sherman clearly was playing for 'now' by spending draft picks on players: two 4s for Glenn, a 2 for Harris and a 2 for moving up to get Walker. The Joe Johnson signing was to try to fix the Reynold debacle.

What Sherman did right: Sherman got Favre as a ten year vet, and developed the best running attack in Packer history to protect Favre as well as keeping the O-line intact. Recall that Favre was injured in both 2002 (knee) and 2003 (thumb). If you don't think that these injuries required some decent coaching to overcome, you missed the games. Also, if you missed the horrendous collection of injuries during 2002 that derailed an 8-1 team, you also weren't watching. Injuries matter, especially when they take away 3 of your starting O-linemen, a defensive end, top two wideouts, top two running backs, your TE, your best safety, etc. all for the critical wild card playoff game. In 2002, it was the injuries, stupid.

Did Sherman screw up in the 2003 playoffs? Well, yes, because he didn't win. But none of the calls he made were individually all that bad. Many other coaches would have made the same calls. Going for it on fourth and one on the goal line to get a big lead. Punting on 4th and one to protect a 3 point lead. Playing zone on 4th and 26. Each of these plays could have turned out right had the execution been correct and/or the luck fair.

I would argue that what happened after the 2003 playoff loss is what earned Sherman a ticket out of town. Screwing up the McKenzie situation (he should have traded him before the draft to get a #2 at that point), screwing up the D-coor change (inexplicable to get a guy with a crazy scheme that didn't fit the roster). The 2004 draft was his worst of the three by far. Finally, I also think it was absurd for Harlan to fire Sherman as GM and keep him on as coach. That was wrong for Sherman AND TT.

Sherman did a lot of good, but he really mucked it up in the end. A very good organizational scheme coach, an average game day coach, and a poor, go-for-broke, risk-taking GM.

[retailguy]

Why does it seem that Shermy apologists usually lack reasoning skills?

He was a good guy with good intentions, so I wont ever bash the guy personally. But he was SLOWLY killing this team.

Actually, I find that most people who HATE Shermy lack reasoning skills. They typically focus on the 4th and one, the #3 for Sander and giving money to KGB and Joe Johnson.




QUOTED FOR TRUTH. Well said mraynrand.

I stand by my earlier comment. If every single person in these forums had their job performance "defined" by cherry picking bad incidents, NONE OF US would have jobs. Everyone makes mistakes, and most have absolutely ZERO to do with the money we make.

Leaper, you underestimate the earning potential and the responsibility that many people in these forums have. Just because you do something insignificant for a living, doesn't mean the rest of us do the same.

Sherman paid a HEAVY PUBLIC price for it. Get over it....

[FritzDontBlitz]

Try to start a post on Looking back on what Sherman did for GB, and I get TT cheerleaders and ignorant bashing. " desperate hot man-love " wow, impressive.
Then we have the guys that can not only see the future, but also know what would have happened if this had happened or if that had happened. Any of you chumps have some lottery numbers you want to share with the rest of us? :crazy:

that's funny. you seem to know that it wouldn't have gotten any worse if sherman would have been kept around but that's NOT thinking you can predict the future? disagreeing with you is not necessarily cheerleading for tt, nor is it bashing mike sherman. my reply may have been blunt, but i stated the reasons i believe the team is better off after parting ways with sherman. i believe sherman was a decent enough coach but was done in by his own ineptness as gm. now, keep something else in mind: tt retained sherman for a year AND gave him a two year extension to give him room to work, but didn't feel that sherman was willing to work with tt after he was forced to step down as gm.

and btw: spare me the "hot man-love" comments. lame jabs like that would make me reply "who needs hot man-love when your momma is available and willing?"

[FritzDontBlitz]

by the way, i'd like to point out something i haven't seen mentioned much since it was accomplished.

in a few years mike sherman will probably become a mere footnote in packers coaching history. what mike sherman will probably best be remembered for is the beautiful renovation of lambeau field. from all accounts he did a great job overseeing that, and its something he should always be proud of.

[mraynrand]

in a few years mike sherman will probably become a mere footnote in packers coaching history. what mike sherman will probably best be remembered for is the beautiful renovation of lambeau field. from all accounts he did a great job overseeing that, and its something he should always be proud of.

He did a nice job on the drywall in the Atrium mens' rooms. I also liked the choice of lighting he got on sale at Home depot. It sure was a mess though, when he tried to re-install the toilets - had to call in the pumber on that one.

[AtlPackFan]

ya.......The same thing might have happened with Sherman, I will agree with that. But saying that it could have been worse??? How much worse would it have to get to be worse than it is now???

Didn't live through the Benston, Devine, Starr, Gregg and Infante years, did you! :sad:

[MJZiggy]

**SHUDDER**

[The Shadow]

Personally, I saw quite enough of Mike Sherman & his inadequacies in talent evaluation & game management, & adjustment long, long ago.
I very much like the way Thompson & McCarthy are going about bringing the Packers back to respectability.

[MateoInMex]

Charmin sucked as a coach and GM.

The guy was funny in his weekly articles about family life though.

Crunchtime came around and Charmin would freeze up and stare at his Denny's menu on the sideline.


That's just my opinon.

[The Leaper]

Sherman walked into GB with a sorry beat up veteran squad and one final fantastic GM year from Wolf. Sherman had crap along the D-line (Theirry, Dotson, Brown, Holliday. Maryland was past his prime but was brought in to replace the ever expanding Brown, and KGB was a rook), O-line (Verba, Winters, Dotson(played two games) and two rookies, LB crew (Bernardo Harris and A beat up Brian Williams were 'the best' on this crew, WR (Schroeder - marginal and Freeman - washed up, led this group) and RB (Levens was washed up, Hendo still competent, Green the FA aquisition) when he arrived. To say that the squad that Sherman inhereted 'was loaded with talent' is just a bunch of crap.

Really?

QB...Favre was still in the prime of his career in his early 30s.
RB...Ahman Green in the fold...in the prime of his career.
OL...So-so veterans on their way out...but young kids with loads of talent. I agree that Sherman should be credited for developing the kids, but merely because guys like Clifton, Wahle and Tauscher were inexperienced does not mean they weren't talented.
WR/TE...Yeah, pretty damn bleak. Can't argue there. However, Favre still put up huge numbers despite the lack of talent, so the importance wasn't utmost for this area.

DL/LB...Pretty damn bleak here too. This is really the only area where Sherman needed to focus.
DB...A lot of talent here...McKenzie and Sharper in their prime.

Overall, that is a pretty talented team. HOF QB. All Pro RB. Three young OL prospects with All Pro talent. Two playmakers in the secondary. No...this team wasn't Super Bowl material, but it was only 1 or 2 players away from serious contention. Throw in a couple strong players in the front 7 on defense, and you've got a hell of a team.

[Badgerinmaine]

I'm not going to try to defend Mike Sherman as a general manager, and certainly not his last draft. But his regular season record stacks up pretty well in Packers history:
http://www.packers.com/history/record_book/summary_charts/coaching_history/

The only three coaches in Packers history with more wins, or a better winning percentage, than Sherman are Lambeau, Lombardi and Holmgren. And to respond to an earlier poster, I sure do remember the Bengtson, Devine, Starr, Gregg and Infante years.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Sherman was a great guy. I think he did everything he could to better the team. Unfortunately, he was an incompetant GM and a lousy coach. He often looked like he was unsure of what to do...a point made all too clear in the Philly debacle.

Incompetent GM? Yes. Lousy coach? No. I wouldn't go that far. I gave him 4 years to prove himself, but like packnuts, when he blew the Philly game, that was about it for me. The next year was the embarrassment against the Vikes in the playoffs. That was the final straw.

[Bretsky]

I didn't like Sherman the GM; and I snapped after the Phily game.

But Sherman the GM is not looking nearly as bad as he did when he left. Off the top of my head he brought in

Barnett
Walker
Al Harris
Scott Wells
Cullen Jenkins
Corey Williams
Aaron Kampman

Not a great job, but for three years that is some nice talent he brought in as well; had Javon Walker stayed about 33% of Green Bay's current starters would be from Sherman's moves as a GM.

Most of the draft day deals were still the worst though and crucified our ability to accumulate depth.

[Deputy Nutz]

I guess when you decide to reach on talent both as a draft evaluator and in free agency things can either go really well or blow up in your face. Things sort of blew up in his face.

I like a lot of people thought that the 2001 season was going to lead to a super bowl, Sherman went after Joe Johnson, and then traded for Terry Glenn, the pieces were thought to have been put in place for a super bowl run. The pieces crumbled in front of us all.

All I can remember is watching Hardy Nickerson failing to make a play because he ran like a third grade, over weight, one legged girl.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I very much like the way Thompson & McCarthy are going about bringing the Packers back to respectability.

back to respectability!!?? There were several consecutive years during the Sherman era when the packers accumulated more wins than any team in the NFL. And remember: Sherm was credited with "bringing the Packers back to respectability" after the Ray Rhodes mini reign.

Look, Sherm was a good coach, and with the recent struggling seasons, I hope the theory that it was "all because of Favre" can be put to rest. When Thompson sends teams to the playoffs year after year, then he will have proved he is as good as Sherm.

Sherm's downfall was a series of deals gone bad on the defensive line. Too Small Jamal, Smokin Joe Johnson, C. Hunt, etc. A lot of these moves were widely praised when he made them, but of course the buck stops with the GM.

[]{ilr]3]

Wow, what made you dig up this thread? last Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:55 pm :lol:



Sherman was a great guy. I think he did everything he could to better the team. Unfortunately, he was an incompetant GM and a lousy coach. He often looked like he was unsure of what to do...a point made all too clear in the Philly debacle.

Incompetent GM? Yes. Lousy coach? No. I wouldn't go that far. I gave him 4 years to prove himself, but like packnuts, when he blew the Philly game, that was about it for me. The next year was the embarrassment against the Vikes in the playoffs. That was the final straw.

[GBRulz]

I know... I was reading it like normal...then came across MY post, I'm like "wait, I didn't post in here" and I see it's from last year.

[AV David]

Is it heresy to say that Vince Lombardi left town because he anticipated the disaster of the 70s and 80s? If he did, it was because he knew the cupboard was bare. All of the old guard was getting old and retiring. He might not to have wanted to tarnish his image by struggling for awhile and having to catch lightning in a bottle twice in a lifetime.

Therein lies the difference between TT and Mike Sherman. Mike Sherman inherited a full cupboard. As a GM, he emptied that cupboard pretty fast. If he had won a Super Bowl, we would all be praising him, but he didn't.

TT inherited Sherman's empty cupboard. He is turnimng it atound in 3-5 years rather than 25 years.

Bottom line:

1. Vince was a heck of a coach and GM.

2. Sherman was a good coach and a lousy GM.

3. TT shows signs of being a heck of a GM, but the jury is still out. I expect a verdict this year or next.

[The Leaper]

I still can't understand why so many people give credit to Sherman for winning...when our division was the most pathetic excuse for NFL football I've seen in years. Sherman had 5 wins guaranteed just about his entire tenure...because Chicago and Detroit were hapless, and Minnesota wasn't much better. The NFC as a whole wasn't much better. The NFC East was pathetic outside of Philly. The NFC West was pathetic outside of STL. The only division that seemed to have any competition was the NFC South.

So, going .500 in the other 10 games is something to be applauded? Losing twice in the playoffs on the turf of Lambeau is to be applauded? Continually being outcoached in making adjustments during the game is something to be applauded?

Sherman was a lousy coach...which is why he still doesn't have a head coaching gig in the NFL 2 years after the fact despite a pretty solid W-L record. Apparently, I'm not the only one who thinks Sherman's coaching was actually inferior to the record he was fortunate to attain.

[HarveyWallbangers]

{ilr]3]Wow, what made you dig up this thread? last Posted: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:55 pm :lol:

I was reading PB's posts from earlier, and thought I'd see what balls of wisdom he's thrown out there previously. I found these gems.
:D

It's fun to bring up old threads. I'm sure there are a few predictions I regret making. Some should regret them even more.
:D

[The Leaper]

I didn't like Sherman the GM; and I snapped after the Phily game.

But Sherman the GM is not looking nearly as bad as he did when he left. Off the top of my head he brought in

Barnett
Walker
Al Harris
Scott Wells
Cullen Jenkins
Corey Williams
Aaron Kampman

So he got lucky a few times late in the draft (Williams, Kampman, Wells) and found a couple guys worthy of being starters on day one. Yippee!

For every name you list, there are at least two miserable failures that he also drafted or signed. Carroll, Sander, Ferguson, Thomas, Peterson, Anderson, Lee, Washington, Roman, Luchey, Glenn.

There is no debate. Sherman was an incompetant GM. Monkeys throwing crap at a draft board could come up with 33% of a roster in 3-4 years time.

[Zool]

Monkeys throwing crap at a draft board could come up with 33% of a roster in 3-4 years time.If I ever become a billionaire, I'm gonna buy a team and test this theory.

[The Leaper]

If I ever become a billionaire, I'm gonna buy a team and test this theory.

Sounds good to me. I'm sure someone has already done something like it...maybe not with the crap throwing...too messy.

People like monkeys.

[run pMc]

If I ever become a billionaire, I'm gonna buy a team and test this theory.

LMAO

Wish I'd thought of that first.

My take: Sherman was a very good coach 6 days of the week, an average coach on gameday, and a below average GM. I think he took risks with drafts, FA & salary cap mgmt which cost him his job. The result: in his final year, there was little depth to make up for all the injuries. The playoff losses to ATL, PHI and MIN were also pretty bad for a lot of people, and didn't help him. He did do some good things in GB, but I think he needed to go.

Jury's still out on TT & M3, but after this season we should know.

[cpk1994]

Sherman was a great guy. I think he did everything he could to better the team. Unfortunately, he was an incompetant GM and a lousy coach. He often looked like he was unsure of what to do...a point made all too clear in the Philly debacle.

Incompetent GM? Yes. Lousy coach? No. I wouldn't go that far. I gave him 4 years to prove himself, but like packnuts, when he blew the Philly game, that was about it for me. The next year was the embarrassment against the Vikes in the playoffs. That was the final straw.
The playoff game against ATL wa the final straw for me. It was when Eric Metcalf was ruled to have fumbled when it clearly it the kicking team player first. Did Sherrman challenge like he should have? No. the game was still close and after that blujder, Atlanta scored and never looked back. That was bad enough, but instead of admitting his mistake after the game, he blamed the REFS saying they told him he couldn't challenge. The head ref even came out to the press and indirectly called Sherman a liar. It was almost a whole week before Sherman finally admiited his mistake. I wanted him fired right then and there.

[The Leaper]

My take: Sherman was a very good coach 6 days of the week, an average coach on gameday, and a below average GM.

I guess I should say I feel Sherman is a lousy coach in terms of strategy and adjustments...which is a HUGE part of the equation.

Where Sherman was superior was in his care for the players and the way he could build a sense of unity and teamwork. I think his teaching background probably plays a role in that. Most guys that played for him spoke honestly about their devotion to him.

Unfortunately, the NFL isn't a place where you can succeed merely on teamwork. It certainly is a building block, but you need solid strategy and capacity to switch horses midstream if necessary...to have a feel for the game taking place and what is happening. Those were the areas that Sherman was lousy in.

[cpk1994]

My take: Sherman was a very good coach 6 days of the week, an average coach on gameday, and a below average GM.

I guess I should say I feel Sherman is a lousy coach in terms of strategy and adjustments...which is a HUGE part of the equation.

Where Sherman was superior was in his care for the players and the way he could build a sense of unity and teamwork. I think his teaching background probably plays a role in that. Most guys that played for him spoke honestly about their devotion to him.

Unfortunately, the NFL isn't a place where you can succeed merely on teamwork. It certainly is a building block, but you need solid strategy and capacity to switch horses midstream if necessary...to have a feel for the game taking place and what is happening. Those were the areas that Sherman was lousy in.

Can't say the same for his assistants.

[woodbuck27]

I didn't like Sherman the GM; and I snapped after the Phily game.

But Sherman the GM is not looking nearly as bad as he did when he left. Off the top of my head he brought in

Barnett
Walker
Al Harris
Scott Wells
Cullen Jenkins
Corey Williams
Aaron Kampman

So he got lucky a few times late in the draft (Williams, Kampman, Wells) and found a couple guys worthy of being starters on day one. Yippee!

For every name you list, there are at least two miserable failures that he also drafted or signed. Carroll, Sander, Ferguson, Thomas, Peterson, Anderson, Lee, Washington, Roman, Luchey, Glenn.

There is no debate. Sherman was an incompetant GM. Monkeys throwing crap at a draft board could come up with 33% of a roster in 3-4 years time.

Ahhhh . . . .the Ole Monkey Crap on the Wall Theory.

Similiar to . . .

the Ted Thompson Diluted Down Draft Theory.

Neither should be adopted.

Generally.

Draft for best quality talent ( HOLD YOUR DRAFT POSITION ) not bodies with limited talents (5th - 7th round picks).

Trade up if your needs or your man is there. Oherwise known as 'GOING FOR IT!

[Deputy Nutz]

Like when Sherman traded up for Kenny Peterson? That was so cool and boy didn't that work out?

[the_idle_threat]

Like when Sherman traded up for Kenny Peterson? That was so cool and boy didn't that work out?


Worked better than B.J. Sander. And James Lee ...

Did we trade up for Donnell Washington?

[woodbuck27]

in a few years mike sherman will probably become a mere footnote in packers coaching history. what mike sherman will probably best be remembered for is the beautiful renovation of lambeau field. from all accounts he did a great job overseeing that, and its something he should always be proud of.

He did a nice job on the drywall in the Atrium mens' rooms. I also liked the choice of lighting he got on sale at Home depot. It sure was a mess though, when he tried to re-install the toilets - had to call in the pumber on that one.

Man. . . thanks for the laugh.

:) X 10.

[The Shadow]

Sherman was not a horrible coach (although he was a terrible GM), but he turned out to be in over his head (big games, postseason, mid-game adjustments, Tom Rossley).
His escalating micromanagement style (remember the receivers coach who left for the same job with another club saying that Sherman would have meetings to plan future meetings?) demonstrated that his solution for improvement eventually almost exclusively consisted solely of the more More MORE! tactic - which of course is no substitute for astuteness.
Seemed like a decent chap - but he was never going to take this team anywhere near a Super Bowl.

[woodbuck27]

Why does it seem that Shermy apologists usually lack reasoning skills?

He was a good guy with good intentions, so I wont ever bash the guy personally. But he was SLOWLY killing this team.

Actually, I find that most people who HATE Shermy lack reasoning skills. They typically focus on the 4th and one, the #3 for Sander and giving money to KGB and Joe Johnson.

The truth is that Sherman wasn't slowly killing the team, he was doing it very rapidly. It should be obvious that Sherman was going for broke trying to win one last time with an aging QB and roster.

Sherman walked into GB with a sorry beat up veteran squad and one final fantastic GM year from Wolf. Sherman had crap along the D-line (Theirry, Dotson, Brown, Holliday. Maryland was past his prime but was brought in to replace the ever expanding Brown, and KGB was a rook), O-line (Verba, Winters, Dotson(played two games) and two rookies, LB crew (Bernardo Harris and A beat up Brian Williams were 'the best' on this crew, WR (Schroeder - marginal and Freeman - washed up, led this group) and RB (Levens was washed up, Hendo still competent, Green the FA aquisition) when he arrived. To say that the squad that Sherman inhereted 'was loaded with talent' is just a bunch of crap.

There will always be an argument about what is the most important factor between guys drafted being talented versus a coach bringing out that talent - so I give equal credit to Wolf and Sherman for drafting, aquiring, developing and using the talents of Clifton, Tauscher, KGB, Franks, and Green. Wolfs' 1999 and 2001 drafts were so-so and pretty crappy, so Sherman pretty much got the pre-1999 hold-overs, the 2000 guys, plus McKenzie, Driver, and Martin.

Sherman clearly was playing for 'now' by spending draft picks on players: two 4s for Glenn, a 2 for Harris and a 2 for moving up to get Walker. The Joe Johnson signing was to try to fix the Reynold debacle.

What Sherman did right: Sherman got Favre as a ten year vet, and developed the best running attack in Packer history to protect Favre as well as keeping the O-line intact. Recall that Favre was injured in both 2002 (knee) and 2003 (thumb). If you don't think that these injuries required some decent coaching to overcome, you missed the games. Also, if you missed the horrendous collection of injuries during 2002 that derailed an 8-1 team, you also weren't watching. Injuries matter, especially when they take away 3 of your starting O-linemen, a defensive end, top two wideouts, top two running backs, your TE, your best safety, etc. all for the critical wild card playoff game. In 2002, it was the injuries, stupid.

Did Sherman screw up in the 2003 playoffs? Well, yes, because he didn't win. But none of the calls he made were individually all that bad. Many other coaches would have made the same calls. Going for it on fourth and one on the goal line to get a big lead. Punting on 4th and one to protect a 3 point lead. Playing zone on 4th and 26. Each of these plays could have turned out right had the execution been correct and/or the luck fair.

I would argue that what happened after the 2003 playoff loss is what earned Sherman a ticket out of town. Screwing up the McKenzie situation (he should have traded him before the draft to get a #2 at that point), screwing up the D-coor change (inexplicable to get a guy with a crazy scheme that didn't fit the roster). The 2004 draft was his worst of the three by far. Finally, I also think it was absurd for Harlan to fire Sherman as GM and keep him on as coach. That was wrong for Sherman AND TT.

Sherman did a lot of good, but he really mucked it up in the end. A very good organizational scheme coach, an average game day coach, and a poor, go-for-broke, risk-taking GM.

Slam dunk on that post.

[Deputy Nutz]

Like when Sherman traded up for Kenny Peterson? That was so cool and boy didn't that work out?


Worked better than B.J. Sander. And James Lee ...

Did we trade up for Donnell Washington?

Yes we did trade up for that retard from Clemson! Good Job.

I think that was the 2003 draft class, maybe the '04 class, but we had 3 third round picks and not one of them is with the team, in fact none of our first day picks are currently(thank god) are with the team.

[Joemailman]

It was the 2004 draft. Mike should have been trading down, not up. He did just fine late in the draft:

Rd Sel# Player Pos. School
1 25 Ahmad Carroll CB Arkansashttp://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/images/smiles/icon_bang.gif
3 70 Joey Thomas CB Montana Statehttp://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/images/smiles/icon_bang.gif
3 72 Donnell Washington DT Clemsonhttp://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/images/smiles/icon_bang.gif
3 87 B.J. Sander P Ohio Statehttp://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/images/smiles/icon_bang.gif
6 179 Corey Williams DT Arkansas Statehttp://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/images/smiles/icon_up.gif
7 251 Scott Wells C Tennesseehttp://www.packerrats.com/ratchat/images/smiles/icon_up.gif

[cpk1994]

Like when Sherman traded up for Kenny Peterson? That was so cool and boy didn't that work out?

How about the 5th and 6th round picks for R-Cal Truluck?

[Bretsky]

Like when Sherman traded up for Kenny Peterson? That was so cool and boy didn't that work out?


Worked better than B.J. Sander. And James Lee ...

Did we trade up for Donnell Washington?

Yes we did trade up for that retard from Clemson! Good Job.

I think that was the 2003 draft class, maybe the '04 class, but we had 3 third round picks and not one of them is with the team, in fact none of our first day picks are currently(thank god) are with the team.


Sherman also traded up for Corey Williams, Javon Walker, and I think Aaron Kampman (although I may be wrong on the last one)

He was a sub par GM, but seeing the bashing has begun I figured I'd point out it did work once in a while too.

[The Leaper]

Draft for best quality talent ( HOLD YOUR DRAFT POSITION ) not bodies with limited talents (5th - 7th round picks).

So you are saying that Thompson gives away top 100 picks for 5th-7th rounders?

Please provide evidence of this for us. I'm intrigued.

[The Leaper]

Trade up if your needs or your man is there. Oherwise known as 'GOING FOR IT!

It all depends on the draft for me. If the draft is deep, trade down when you feel equal talent will be available later and acquire additional picks. If the draft is thin, stay put or trade up.

[MadtownPacker]

Another Sherman thread??? :roll:

[Bretsky]

Another Sherman thread??? :roll:

Pretty dam boring offseason when we have to bring Sherman back.

BTW, thanks for the goodies; great stuff :clap:

[Fritz]

How long can we keep the Sherman debate going? Do you think, in twenty years, we can still bring it up and debate it? Couple of old, old fogeys going toe-to-toe? Could be fun.

"Dad gummit, I remember back when I was a young pup, Mike Sherman was the coach. Then the legend, Ron Wolf, went and gave Sherman the GM's job. I'll never forget that day. I was drinking some Lienys down at the bar, and..."

Like that?

[KYPack]

Really Fritz.

I mean, it's a historical arguent qat best
We should slag Thomspon for his mistake, & Lord knows, he's made a few.

But why talk about the PSL at all?

I liked 'ol Mikey. He busted his ass to try & bring home a winner. He failed and moved on. But the arguments about who's "better" seem strange to me. Let's cheer Thompson when he succeds and slag him when he fails, but MS is bgone & done.

let's try to forget the boy.

[packrat]

I'm trying, I'm trying!!!

[Carolina_Packer]

As much credit as we need to give to Wolf and Harlan for their part in the build-up to the two Super Bowl years is as much blame as they deserve for two blunderous moves.

Hiring Ray Rhodes to succeed Mike Holmgren was a mistake that Wolf admitted to. I appreciate him owning up, but it still set the team back.

Hiring an inexperienced coach in Mike Sherman was not exactly a bad mistake, given that he ended up having some good regular season success and the teams were competetive, save for his last year when the team was killed by injuries.

Hiring Sherman as the GM and giving him a dual-role of HC/GM was a colossal mistake. First, I've never liked the dual role; ever. It has only worked successfully in a few cases, but more often than not, it doesn't. Knowing that, why would you give a guy who just completed his first year as a head coach the GM reigns? It made no sense then, just as today.

We can blame Sherman on the surface, but I think we need to look at who created the situation. Sherman was just doing the best he could, and was obviously out of his depth when it came to being a GM. Could it have had anything to do with the fact that either job HC or GM are by themselves demanding enough? Yes. Then you go and give the job to an inexperienced guy like Sherman. Why didn't we just have a Bo Bo the chimp throw a dart at a list of candidates?

[Jerry Tagge]

I want to be one of the old fogeys talking about Sherman in 20 years.

Personally, I'd rather talk about Estus Hood.

[CaliforniaCheez]

Sherman had a losing season and got fired.

Ray Rhodes had a .500 season and was fired.

McCarthy did not have a winning season and yet he was retained.

McCarthy will be on thin ice or the hot seat this season.

[superfan]

Another Sherman thread??? :roll:

Agreed.

unsubscribe

[HarveyWallbangers]

Sherman had a losing season and got fired.

Ray Rhodes had a .500 season and was fired.

McCarthy did not have a winning season and yet he was retained.

McCarthy will be on thin ice or the hot seat this season.

Funny! Rhodes was .500, but McCarthy "did not have a winning season." Rhodes took over a team that was two years removed from the Super Bowl, and made the playoffs the year before. McCarthy took over a team that was ten years removed from the Super Bowl, and was 4-12 the year before. No, I'd say McCarthy has the full three years to get it done.

[Iron Mike]

Ok, only time will tell just how much we should or should not have appreciated Shermans time in GB as a coach and GM. I for one, have still not jumped on the TT bandwagon, and I am not about to any time soon. I have not seen enough improvements to this team to warrant jumping on his bandwagon.


Bumped for ensuing hilarity. 8-)

[Brandon494]

haha great thread

[Patler]

As near as I can tell, there are still as many "Wolf players" as "Sherman players" on the roster seven years after Wolf left.

Wolf brought in Favre, Davis, Driver, Tauscher, Clifton, Franks and KGB.
Sherman brought Kampman, Barnett, Harris, Williams, Cole, Jenkins and Wells.

The other 39 have come in the last 3 years.

[Tarlam!]

Well, I would count Nall as a Shermie guy.

[Patler]

Well, I would count Nall as a Shermie guy.

To be honest, I was looking at a roster from the beginning of the season that didn't have Nall on it, and I forgot all about him. Interesting question though, is he a "Shermie" because he drafted him, or a "Teddie" for being signed off the street after leaving in free agency?

[packrat]

I wonder how many Forrest Greg admirers are still around? I thought it was great when he was brought in, and he turned into a Sherman sized disaster. All those waiting to see if TT succeeds or not are just trying to put off the day of their humiliation and the longer they wait, the greater the humiliation. There is still time to put being a fan ahead of trying to preserve your prognosticator credentials, and given the track record of some of the naysayers, don't you think being a fan would be a little more fun?

[RashanGary]

I think bad GM's have a funny way of looking unlucky most of the time and good GM's have a funny way of seeming to get lucky. I don't think it's luck. It's like a poker player who never seems to get burned. It's the cards, right? Not really, there are risks worth taking and some not worth taking. Nothing is sure, but if you play the odds you win over the long haul. Of course there is more to it than a couple sentence poker analogy, but there is something to calculating risks as a GM that tends to look like luck of the cards but is probably better defined as skill.

Sherman did have scouts at his disposal. I dont' think he failed so much on talent evaluation. I think he failed in calculating risks. Ted Thompson, on the other hand, seems to rarely get burned. He looks lucky, but I think there is some skill in calculating risks that Thompson has (and Sherman didn't). On top of that, I think Thompson brings an edge to the scouting department as well. I think Thompson is just better than Sherman accross the board. If I had to desribe Thompson in one word it would be oppertunistic. If I had to describe Sherman in one word it would be desperate, but unqualified or unprepared might hit closer to the root of his problem.

Sherman deserves credit for giving a great effort, doing everythign the way it's supposed to be done. He conformed to the cookie cutter leadership that is supposed to be so successfull. That will only go so far. Some jobs are better to be skilled and wise than to be a follower (of rules and teachings) masking as a leader.

I think Thompson will get credit for being skilled and doing a great job. He might not be the conformist, cookie cutter leader. He might not follow the robotic motivation tactics or live his life according to what he's told works best. What he lacks in passed down cookie cutter leadership, he makes up with unique skill.

[Deputy Nutz]

In regards to the thread title, no not really.