What the FUCK!!!!

[Anti-Polar Bear]

:evil: :twisted: :evil: :twisted:

I was just reviewing the NFL salary cap at March 10 and Green Bay was and probably is still at the top.

All Thompson could get thus far was Pickett, Manuel and that WR (what the hell is his name again). The fucking Giants have less money than GB and they still did outbid the Polar Bear for Arrington.

Talk about inefficient use of the cap. This is how the Polar Bear fucked up the Green Bay Packers. This is the Polar Bear being CHEAP. So many teams did more with far less money than the Packers, especially Washington.

Green Bay is obviously flawed in free agency because we have a flawed and fagged and fucked GM.


Team Cap status, March 10 (under)
Green Bay Packers $35 million
Minnesota Vikings $30.9 million
Arizona Cardinals $28.9 million
Cleveland Browns $27.1 million
Philadelphia Eagles $26.1 million
San Diego Chargers $24.6 million
Jacksonville Jaguars $23.4 million
Dallas Cowboys $22.6 million
St. Louis Rams $22.1 million
New Orleans Saints $20.2 million
San Francisco 49ers $20.2 million
Detroit Lions $17.7 million
Seattle Seahawks $17.3 million
New England Patriots $16.9 million
Cincinnati Bengals $16.6 million
Chicago Bears $14.9 million
Buffalo Bills $14.1 million
New York Jets $14 million
Houston Texans $12.7 million
Atlanta Falcons $12.2 million
Denver Broncos $10.9 million
Baltimore Ravens $10.6 million
Carolina Panthers $10.4 million
New York Giants $9.9 million
Kansas City Chiefs $7.3 million
Miami Dolphins $6.3 million
Tennessee Titans $6.2 million
Pittsburgh Steelers $6.1 million
Tampa Bay Buccaneers $5.1 million
Oakland Raiders $653,000
Indianapolis Colts ($5.9 million)
Washington Redskins ($4.9 million)

[Rastak]

I found this on an espn board..


Keep in mind that these numbers remain tentative -- and are changing on a daily basis. These "unofficial" figures are approximate as of April 4, 2006.


Projected 2006 NFL Salary Cap Space for Each Team

Rank Team $ Under the Cap
1 San Diego Chargers $19.5 M

2 Green Bay Packers $19 M

3 Philadelphia Eagles $18.5 M

4 New England Patriots $18.42 M

5 Cincinnati Bengals $15.9 M

6 Jacksonville Jaguars $15.297 M

7 San Francisco 49ers $15 M

8 New Orleans Saints $14.95 M

9 NY Jets $14.535 M

10 Arizona Cardinals $14.243 M

11 Dallas Cowboys $13.168 M

12 Chicago Bears $11.89 M

13 Seattle Seahawks $11.5 M

14 Cleveland Browns $10.935 M

15 St. Louis Rams $10.785 M

16 Minnesota Vikings $10.207 M

17 Tampa Bay Buccaneers $9.775 M

18 Kansas City Chiefs $9.755 M

19 Indianapolis Colts $8.912 M

20 Denver Broncos $7.325 M

21 Baltimore Ravens $6.87 M

22 Houston Texans $5.16 M

23 Miami Dolphins $4.84 M

24 Buffalo Bills $4.8 M

25 Pittsburgh Steelers $4.8 M

26 Washington Redskins $4.355 M

27 Oakland Raiders $3.947 M

28 NY Giants $3.93 M

29 Detroit Lions $3.5 M

30 Atlanta Falcons $3.494 M

31 Carolina Panthers $3.325 M

32 Tennessee Titans $462300

[RashanGary]

If you look at the teams on the top of the list and compare them to the teams on the bottom of the list it makes it even harder to believe idiots like Tank are still running their mouths about the same old crap.

[Rastak]

If you look at the teams on the top of the list and compare them to the teams on the bottom of the list it makes it even harder to believe idiots like Tank are still running their mouths about the same old crap.


The superbowl champs are 25.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

2 Green Bay Packers $19 M


26 Washington Redskins $4.355 M

[/quote]

At March 10, the Redskins were over $4.9 mil. They signed all those players and are now they are $4.355 mil under. Take Heed thompson!!!

[billy_oliver880]

Titans don't even have enough cash to sign any draft choices. :shock: :shock:

[Anti-Polar Bear]

If you look at the teams on the top of the list and compare them to the teams on the bottom of the list it makes it even harder to believe idiots like Tank are still running their mouths about the same old crap.

Hey collins, you son of a bitch, all those teams with less money than the pack are better than the pack.

[Deputy Nutz]

Thats why they have to get McNair's cap number down or they need to cut him. 21 million in cap space is a lot for one player, but don't quote me on that.

[Rastak]

Titans don't even have enough cash to sign any draft choices. :shock: :shock:

That's why McNair will be given the boot soon.

[MJZiggy]

They can sign their draft choices...provided they never let their qb back in the building.

And by the way, Tank, the Giants were NOT the top bid for Arrington's services.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

And by the way, Tank, the Giants were NOT the top bid for Arrington's services.

Who is then?

[Rastak]

And by the way, Tank, the Giants were NOT the top bid for Arrington's services.

Who is then?

Word is Green Bay had a slightly higher offer but he turned it down.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Arrington's bonus was only 5.25, add is 3 mil base salary and that equals to $8.25. What the fuck didnt thompson just hand Arrington a $10 mil SB? What the fuck is thompson gonna do with the $19 mil? Fuck a guy each day?

Sorry about the excess cussing. I am just so mad now.

[Rastak]

Arrington's bonus was only 5.25, add is 3 mil base salary and that equals to $8.25. What the fuck didnt thompson just hand Arrington a $10 mil SB? What the fuck is thompson gonna do with the $19 mil? Fuck a guy each day?

Sorry about the excess cussing. I am just so mad now.


That would be enough to finance that most likely.

[MJZiggy]

How 'bout give nice bonuses to guys like Driver who've earned them? Sign the draft picks to decent contracts and pick up some more streets for camp, then keep a stash in case we have another rash of injuries (God forbid) next season and we have to sign some people to take over midseason? Oh and keep some in case someone interesting comes up in the meantime.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

And by the way, Tank, the Giants were NOT the top bid for Arrington's services.

Who is then?

Word is Green Bay had a slightly higher offer but he turned it down.

Then that only show that Thompson fucked up. The good GM would be able to lure at least 2 Pro Bowler to Green Bay with $35 mil. Thompson has none.

Arrington's signing with the Gaints just shows that nobody with exceptional talant wants to play for the fucking polar bear.

[MJZiggy]

past pro bowls don't guarantee future pro bowls...remind me again...why did Washington let him go?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

past pro bowls don't guarantee future pro bowls...remind me again...why did Washington let him go?

There was a conflict of interest between the organization and Arrington. That doesnt mean Arrington is washed up. Is Arrington better than the LBs we have? Yes. Would Arrington upgrade the LB crops? Yes. Did Thompson fucked up? Yes.

[MJZiggy]

How EXACTLY?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

How EXACTLY?

Is the Packers any better at LB now the Arrington is gone? Ask yourself that and you will see the light of truth.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Another player who shouldve been in Green and Gold is Chad Hutchinson. But because thompson is so fucking cheap, hutchinson ended up with fucking rival minnesota.

talk about fuck up.

[MJZiggy]

That doesn't answer my question. How did Thompson screw up getting Arrington here. By not performing a Chinese Water Torture treatment until he signed the contract? If he's not going to do it, he's not going to do it.

[billy_oliver880]

You aren't going to get the answer you want Zig. Tank would want to trade all of our picks away to get him.

[RashanGary]

Maybe we should have offered Hutchinson 100 mil over 5 years. That way we would have the leagues best gaurd.

Wait a minute if we spend 20 mil per year on a gaurd then we won't have enough money to keep our other good players....If that happens we'll have a good gaurd but a crappy supporting cast......Something just came to me. One decision effects the other when dealing with a set budget and football teams can't just toss money around like it grew on trees.


Thompson just stated in his conference that he will attemt to fill holes using FA but will not pay more than he believes a player is worth. With that in mind and our newly discovered understanding of the simple cause and effect relationship, we could deduct that Thompson made a decision not to overpay for a player he beleives will not be worth his contract.

Wow....With a 2nd grade understanding of cause and effect and a little extra highschool deductive reasoning we can begin to understand the world around us and not live life so angry and frustrated. Go unwind to some coldplay you damn moron because thinking things through is obviously not a stress reliever your capable of exercising.

[MJZiggy]

You aren't going to get the answer you want Zig. Tank would want to trade all of our picks away to get him.

Just checking to see if he's switched to harder substances.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

That doesn't answer my question. How did Thompson screw up getting Arrington here. By not performing a Chinese Water Torture treatment until he signed the contract? If he's not going to do it, he's not going to do it.



What do you think; I'm online every fucking second of the day? Please, I had to go get some shit to eat cos i hadn’t ate anything all day.

As for your question, Arrington is not a Green Bay Packer and that’s why Thompson screwed up. When you have a shot, and have more money than the other team and you end up empty handed, that is the mother of all fuck up.

The good GM must be able to persuade talented players to come to his team if he wants to field a winner, much like a college coach must be able to recruit the top players to his team if he wishes to win the Championship. Arrington is just an example of another player out of many who told Thompson to go fuck himself. Woodson, Hutchinson, Bentley or Peterson, among others, are players any good GM would’ve gotten.

Ted Thompson is not a good GM.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Maybe we should have offered Hutchinson 100 mil over 5 years. That way we would have the leagues best gaurd.




Thompson just stated in his conference that he will attemt to fill holes using FA but will not pay more than he believes a player is worth. With that in mind and our newly discovered understanding of the simple cause and effect relationship, we could deduct that Thompson made a decision not to overpay for a player he beleives will not be worth his contract.


Since you are the genius here, explain how that notion is going help the Packers make the playoffs, please.

[MJZiggy]

That doesn't answer my question. How did Thompson screw up getting Arrington here. By not performing a Chinese Water Torture treatment until he signed the contract? If he's not going to do it, he's not going to do it.



What do you think; I'm online every fucking second of the day? Please, I had to go get some shit to eat cos i hadn’t ate anything all day.

As for your question, Arrington is not a Green Bay Packer and that’s why Thompson screwed up. When you have a shot, and have more money than the other team and you end up empty handed, that is the mother of all fuck up.

The good GM must be able to persuade talented players to come to his team if he wants to field a winner, much like a college coach must be able to recruit the top players to his team if he wishes to win the Championship. Arrington is just an example of another player out of many who told Thompson to go fuck himself. Woodson, Hutchinson, Bentley or Peterson, among others, are players any good GM would’ve gotten.

Ted Thompson is not a good GM.

I just want to know precisely what it is you think he did wrong to not get Arrington? Is it TT's fault we don't play in the East? Should he have moved the team to accomodate him? How would YOU have gotten him in GB, Tank?

[pacfan]

geez, I didn't know we could write cuss words. this is to cool.

[RashanGary]

I'm on my way to work....I'll respond later....

It's complicated but it involves getting the most talent possible with the cap space you have and how certain moves and decisions effect that.

I think you can figure out a few different ways that a GM can get more talent out of his 100 mil than the next guy can with his 100 mil but if you want a list of a few things that push franchises in the right direction I will give a list of a few things and how the Packers have not accomplished those things over the last 5 years.

[MJZiggy]

But Tank feels that this is ALL TT's fault and that nothing that happened before his arrival bears any culpability for the state of this team because they happened to be winning at the time without taking into consideration how past actions affect the current situation. Therefore since his current gripe is with TT's handling of the LA deal, I wanna know how Tank gets it done.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

It's complicated but it involves getting the most talent possible with the cap space you have and how certain moves and decisions effect that.



You just contradicted yourself. To get the most out of your cap numbers is to be efficent, and efficient cap management is what ive been talking about for eons.

Only a son of a bitch like you would refuse to believe that Arrington, Woodson, Bentley and Hutchinson arent upgrades.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

geez, I didn't know we could write cuss words. this is to cool.

Fuck you Pacman; you motherfucker!

:wink: :mrgreen:

[Anti-Polar Bear]

I just want to know precisely what it is you think he did wrong to not get Arrington? Is it TT's fault we don't play in the East? Should he have moved the team to accomodate him? How would YOU have gotten him in GB, Tank?


What did Polar Bear do wrong? Did not do enough to persuade Arrington to come to green Bay. Did not show Arrington more money; dismantled a playoffs team; forcing Brett Favre into retirement; gave birth to 4-12; no other major FA signing. Those are all the things Thompson did wrong.

Is it Thompson’s fault we don’t play in the east? It is thompsons fault that he did not resign after the 4-12 fuck up. Hes a terrible GM and he isnt doing the Pack any good with his tendency to hibernate at critical moments.

Should he have moved the team to accommodate him? No, he should resigns, and let someone like Sherman handle the GM duties.

How would I have gotten Arrington in GB? With $35 mil and the option to free up more cap space (the way Washington did), before signing Arrington, I wouldve signed Bently, Hutchinson, Owens and Peterson, and Woodson. This would also mean a Favre return. During the Arrington courtship, Favres status was thought to be instrumental in Arrington’s decision, and Favre's decision lies on what the GM does in f.a. Lastly, I would give Arrington a $10 mil s.b.

[MJZiggy]

What should he have done to persuade Arrington? How much should he have offered?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

What should he have done to persuade Arrington? How much should he have offered?

Read the thread above your last post again, please.

[MJZiggy]

Sorry, saw the word 'dismantled' and my mind read blah, blah, blah. You don't think if TT offered a $10 million signing bonus that has to get spread over the remaining years of the contract, you wouldn't be screaming at him for overspending on an injured, non-performing linebacker who couldn't get along with his last coach...? I'd say you would have. You are telling me that you think he's worth that much money?

[pacfan]

[quote=MJZiggy]

How would I have gotten Arrington in GB? With $35 mil and the option to free up more cap space (the way Washington did), before signing Arrington, I wouldve signed Bently, Hutchinson, Owens and Peterson, and Woodson. This would also mean a Favre return. During the Arrington courtship, Favres status was thought to be instrumental in Arrington’s decision, and Favre's decision lies on what the GM does in f.a. Lastly, I would give Arrington a $10 mil s.b.

There is no guarantee that dropping major cash on somebody else's free agents is going to equal success. Look at Minnesota, they've been chasing after the 'perfect' defense for years. They still have an empty trophy case.

Am I dissapointed that we didn't sign Owens, yeah. Arrington, a little yeah. Hutchinson, umm not really. Peterson, no. Bentley, yeah.

As much as I am grateful for the last 15 years Favre has been here, I think the pack shouldn't cater to just one player. I realize how great he is and what he has done, but its better for us long-term to cultivate our own talent and build a solid team.

TT has had one season to fix the shit that Sherman left us. I say he has at least one more season before I start dropping f-bombs on his skinny white head.

[MJZiggy]

That's a good point pacfan. Tank Washington's been buying up free agents and putting themselves in cap hell for years. Tell me...how did the Redskins do in these last 3 Superbowls? They didn't even make the playoffs til last year. How did they do? And I still say if Arrington had signed you'd have claimed that the deal was all wrong and it was TT's screwup.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

[quote=MJZiggy]

How would I have gotten Arrington in GB? With $35 mil and the option to free up more cap space (the way Washington did), before signing Arrington, I wouldve signed Bently, Hutchinson, Owens and Peterson, and Woodson. This would also mean a Favre return. During the Arrington courtship, Favres status was thought to be instrumental in Arrington’s decision, and Favre's decision lies on what the GM does in f.a. Lastly, I would give Arrington a $10 mil s.b.

There is no guarantee that dropping major cash on somebody else's free agents is going to equal success. Look at Minnesota, they've been chasing after the 'perfect' defense for years. They still have an empty trophy case.

Am I dissapointed that we didn't sign Owens, yeah. Arrington, a little yeah. Hutchinson, umm not really. Peterson, no. Bentley, yeah.

As much as I am grateful for the last 15 years Favre has been here, I think the pack shouldn't cater to just one player. I realize how great he is and what he has done, but its better for us long-term to cultivate our own talent and build a solid team.

TT has had one season to fix the shit that Sherman left us. I say he has at least one more season before I start dropping f-bombs on his skinny white head.

What shit did sherman "left us."?

Was Minnesota better than us last year?

The Cardinals and Lions keeps drafting high, and were they ever contender the last few years?

Did Seattle made the SB by upgrading their roster or rebuilding after last season?

You dont care about Hutchinson? You love Klemm and Whitticker, right?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

That's a good point pacfan. Tank Washington's been buying up free agents and putting themselves in cap hell for years. Tell me...how did the Redskins do in these last 3 Superbowls? They didn't even make the playoffs til last year. How did they do? And I still say if Arrington had signed you'd have claimed that the deal was all wrong and it was TT's screwup.

I will ask you the same question i asked collins: explain how the idea of not taking chances at upgrading your roster supposed to help the Packers make the playoffs again, please.

Both Wolf and Sherman weren't cowards like thompson. They took chances in FA to supplement the draft. Bother were winners. Is Thompson a winner?

No risk, no reward.

[Scott Campbell]

Another player who shouldve been in Green and Gold is Chad Hutchinson. But because thompson is so fucking cheap, hutchinson ended up with fucking rival minnesota.

talk about fuck up.


Why do you want Chad Hutchinson? He sucks.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Another player who shouldve been in Green and Gold is Chad Hutchinson. But because thompson is so fucking cheap, hutchinson ended up with fucking rival minnesota.

talk about fuck up.


Why do you want Chad Hutchinson? He sucks.

O thanks for the corection, wise one.

I meant the other Hutuchinson. The OG that Minnesota signed from Seattle. What is his first name again?

[MJZiggy]

That's a good point pacfan. Tank Washington's been buying up free agents and putting themselves in cap hell for years. Tell me...how did the Redskins do in these last 3 Superbowls? They didn't even make the playoffs til last year. How did they do? And I still say if Arrington had signed you'd have claimed that the deal was all wrong and it was TT's screwup.

I will ask you the same question i asked collins: explain how the idea of not taking chances at upgrading your roster supposed to help the Packers make the playoffs again, please.

Both Wolf and Sherman weren't cowards like thompson. They took chances in FA to supplement the draft. Bother were winners. Is Thompson a winner?

No risk, no reward.

Sherman took chances in FA, sure. He also 'dismantled' the Pack as you are so fond of saying...

[Scott Campbell]

Another player who shouldve been in Green and Gold is Chad Hutchinson. But because thompson is so fucking cheap, hutchinson ended up with fucking rival minnesota.

talk about fuck up.


Why do you want Chad Hutchinson? He sucks.

O thanks for the corection, wise one.

I meant the other Hutuchinson. The OG that Minnesota signed from Seattle. What is his first name again?

Well just be glad Ted didn't listen to you and give $49M to the wrong Hutchinson. I think you meant Steve.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Sherman took chances in FA, sure. He also 'dismantled' the Pack as you are so fond of saying...

How is that?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Well just be glad Ted didn't listen to you and give $49M to the wrong Hutchinson. I think you meant Steve.

True. Still, thompson shouldve given $55 Mil to that Steve Hutchinson.

[MJZiggy]

Did he or did he not let Sharper go, who, by the way went on to a Pro-Bowl year for Minnesota and his replacement did not, in fact, make the Pro Bowl, so that makes Sherman just as culpable for that loss o performance as TT is for the loss of Wahle's performance. They're so they're even and you can no longer use the loss of Wahle to convince me of anything.

[Scott Campbell]

I think Tank is doing more for the Pro Thompson agenda than anyone here.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Did he or did he not let Sharper go, who, by the way went on to a Pro-Bowl year for Minnesota and his replacement did not, in fact, make the Pro Bowl, so that makes Sherman just as culpable for that loss o performance as TT is for the loss of Wahle's performance. They're so they're even and you can no longer use the loss of Wahle to convince me of anything.

Sharper was let go last year by no other than Mr. Polar Bear.

Sherman was the one who kept restructuring Sharpers contract so he could not only remain with GB but also help the team's finance. It might be understandable to let Sharper go if he was to count $21 Mil against the cap. Sharper did not count $21 Mil against the cap last year.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

I think Tank is doing more for the Pro Thompson agenda than anyone here.

why that? because i mixed steve with chad?

[Joemailman]

I think Tank is doing more for the Pro Thompson agenda than anyone here.


Maybe Tank really is Thompson. By constantly "attacking" Thompson, he is trying to get people to rally behind Thompson. :razz:

[MJZiggy]

Did he or did he not let Sharper go, who, by the way went on to a Pro-Bowl year for Minnesota and his replacement did not, in fact, make the Pro Bowl, so that makes Sherman just as culpable for that loss o performance as TT is for the loss of Wahle's performance. They're so they're even and you can no longer use the loss of Wahle to convince me of anything.

Sharper was let go last year by no other than Mr. Polar Bear.

Sherman was the one who kept restructuring Sharpers contract so he could not only remain with GB but also help the team's finance. It might be understandable to let Sharper go if he was to count $21 Mil against the cap. Sharper did not count $21 Mil against the cap last year.

The Sharper fiasco is what got Mike Sherman fired as GM. If you will recall, Sherman tried to restructure the contract and Sharper wouldn't do it. Sherman couldn't get Sharper to take the pay cut. Sherman was worrying about what to do about Sharper instead of concentrating on upcoming playoff strategies to the point that he got fired.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Did he or did he not let Sharper go, who, by the way went on to a Pro-Bowl year for Minnesota and his replacement did not, in fact, make the Pro Bowl, so that makes Sherman just as culpable for that loss o performance as TT is for the loss of Wahle's performance. They're so they're even and you can no longer use the loss of Wahle to convince me of anything.

Sharper was let go last year by no other than Mr. Polar Bear.

Sherman was the one who kept restructuring Sharpers contract so he could not only remain with GB but also help the team's finance. It might be understandable to let Sharper go if he was to count $21 Mil against the cap. Sharper did not count $21 Mil against the cap last year.

The Sharper fiasco is what got Mike Sherman fired as GM. If you will recall, Sherman tried to restructure the contract and Sharper wouldn't do it. Sherman couldn't get Sharper to take the pay cut. Sherman was worrying about what to do about Sharper instead of concentrating on upcoming playoff strategies to the point that he got fired.

i dont mean to sound disrespectful, but as the thread title suggest, what the fuck? Show me the source of that. Sherman was not GM last year. Thompson is and the polar bear wanted sharper to take a pay cut, and thats why sharper bolted.

There is a hugh different between taking a paycut and restructuring your contract.

[MJZiggy]

Gimme a little while. I'll have to look it up again after dinner, but I warn you, it exists.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

I think Tank is doing more for the Pro Thompson agenda than anyone here.


Maybe Tank really is Thompson. By constantly "attacking" Thompson, he is trying to get people to rally behind Thompson. :razz:

I'm not thompson, nor do i hate him personally. Football-wise I want him fired, or to resign before he put the Packers in more ruin.

[Scott Campbell]

why that? because i mixed steve with chad?


It seems more like you've mixed polar bear tranquilizers with alcohol.

[RashanGary]

Different things a GM can do that does not cost extra $$ but does improve the team:

1. Drafting the best possible player in your draft position *Example: if you pick 5th you will be paying the amount of $$ that is associated with the #5 draft slot in that years draft regardless of the players acctual production. If you select a star player you will pay him 4 mil per year. If you select a dud you will pay him 4 mil per year. By selecting a star you are getting good value for your $$. By selecting a dud you are still paying him but have to also pay another player to play the position he should be playing. Your team has less talent and less money for other talent because of this mistake ala Jamal Reynolds*

2. Consistantly over years drafting well. *By doing this your players develop a loyalty to the team that drafted them. They feel a sense of accomplishment and a sense of enjoyment for what they are contributing to. They feel appreciated because your team thought highly enough of them to pick them above all the other players available. It is just good on all levels. Because of this general feeling of good will players will often take fair contracts in order to build through the club who picked them. Also, tags such as Franchise and Transition can be used on star players to retain their services. There are also tenders that can be placed on young players who are exiting their rookie contracts. This allows you to keep your stars and good players without having to compete directly with other teams which would drive the prices up.

3. You do a great job evaluating the talent around the league and in other leagues or talent pools. When players get released or hit the market you are able to properly assess the players value and add young, cheap, effective talent to your roster. By filling a hole on your team with a good player who doesn't make big $$ you now have a hole filled and extra $$ to spend on your stars who you hopefully drafted earlier and now need to get paid.


The best teams do these things consistantly as well as take advantage of the FA market when players of value arise. Grady Jackson is an example of a good adition. Donald Lee is another example. High priced FA's who are unlikely to play to the level of their expected contracts like Joe Johnson are examples of how a team can get burned by taking a risk. If you make a mistake you are paying for a player and then have to also play for his replacement. It is the GM's job to calculate these risks and decide how much a player is worth. When deciding how much a player is worth a GM thinks about how good he is in relation to the rest of the league and projects his future value. If the value does not meet the price a good GM will let the player go and fill the hole using one of the alternate routes listed above. If you draft well consistantly and properly evaluate undrafted talent you won't have too many glaring holes so consistant good drafts is the main key to success.

Over the last 4 years preceding Thompson, Wolf and Sherman got 4 good players in 4 years of drafting. Carroll, Walker *who's leaving anyway*, Barnett and Kampman. Because of these horrible drafts the Packers have many glaring holes and in turn have a crappy team. You could minimize the bleeding today by filling the holes with over priced players but that would ultimately hurt the long term success of the team because those players are getting more than they are worth in relation to the league. The preferred option is to properly evaluate talent and draft well consistantly year after year. Keep yoru players to fair contracts like Wahle *was a mistake* and don't overspend on others. The reason I liek Thompson is because he beleives in building this way and I understand and agree with his direction. I do not know how he is going to do but based on his spoken direction I believe he will do well.

[pacfan]

No risk, no reward?

Arrington didn't want to play in Green Bay, period. He said that early on, but he needed a team with cap space to lure a better contract. He had zero intention of siging here. If his decision was based on Favre, then we are even better off w/o him here. Favre is done after next year, no matter what. then we are stuck with a mega-contract and mega-headache.

Owens, he would have been nice, but he already is ruffling feathers in Dallas. I don't think signing Owens would have put us over the top for SB 41.

Hutchinson, he would have been a nice signing. It would have been poetic since he was picked with the draft choice Wolf sent to SEA for Jamal Reynolds. But we don't need high-priced guards for the zone blocking scheme. Why spend big bucks when you don't have to?

Take a breath, tank, breath deep...I'm not done yet.

LeBently, I would have dropped some cash for him. The center is important in any blocking scheme and he would have been good for us. Young, healthy, etc... But if we are outbid, then we lose out. TT can't make them sign here.

The other part of the equation is, do they fit in here? Dropping big bucks on some 'big' names doesn't ensure that they will perform like they did. Arrington didn't fit the scheme and he paid Washington to leave. Peterson was a headache for SF. Woodson, he was a primadonna who forced the other coach to get canned (the wisconsin guy, before Turner-blanking on his name). Why inherit their problem?

but seriously......Mike Sherman?

and don't even try to say things were good with Sherman. How many trophys did he produce? I think he picked one pro-bowl player in his drafts. You are going to defend the guy that gave Cletidus his meal-ticket, Johnson his ganga, BJ a 300G sideline job. Trading UP to the third-round for a PUNTER!!! The man who gave us Bhwo Jue, Robert Ferguson OVER Chris Chambers. The guy had serious man-love for Tyrone Davis. He gave Wahle that silly backloaded contract that forced us to cut him.

4th and 1..... I...I need some air.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Different things a GM can do that does not cost extra $$ but does improve the team:

1. Drafting the best possible player in your draft position *Example: if you pick 5th you will be paying the amount of $$ that is associated with the #5 draft slot in that years draft regardless of the players acctual production. If you select a star player you will pay him 4 mil per year. If you select a dud you will pay him 4 mil per year. By selecting a star you are getting good value for your $$. By selecting a dud you are still paying him but have to also pay another player to play the position he should be playing. Your team has less talent and less money for other talent because of this mistake ala Jamal Reynolds*

2. Consistantly over years drafting well. *By doing this your players develop a loyalty to the team that drafted them. They feel a sense of accomplishment and a sense of enjoyment for what they are contributing to. They feel appreciated because your team thought highly enough of them to pick them above all the other players available. It is just good on all levels. Because of this general feeling of good will players will often take fair contracts in order to build through the club who picked them. Also, tags such as Franchise and Transition can be used on star players to retain their services. There are also tenders that can be placed on young players who are exiting their rookie contracts. This allows you to keep your stars and good players without having to compete directly with other teams which would drive the prices up.

3. You do a great job evaluating the talent around the league and in other leagues or talent pools. When players get released or hit the market you are able to properly assess the players value and add young, cheap, effective talent to your roster. By filling a hole on your team with a good player who doesn't make big $$ you now have a hole filled and extra $$ to spend on your stars who you hopefully drafted earlier and now need to get paid.


The best teams do these things consistantly as well as take advantage of the FA market when players of value arise. Grady Jackson is an example of a good adition. Donald Lee is another example. High priced FA's who are unlikely to play to the level of their expected contracts like Joe Johnson are examples of how a team can get burned by taking a risk. If you make a mistake you are paying for a player and then have to also play for his replacement. It is the GM's job to calculate these risks and decide how much a player is worth. When deciding how much a player is worth a GM thinks about how good he is in relation to the rest of the league and projects his future value. If the value does not meet the price a good GM will let the player go and fill the hole using one of the alternate routes listed above. If you draft well consistantly and properly evaluate undrafted talent you won't have too many glaring holes so consistant good drafts is the main key to success.

Over the last 4 years preceding Thompson, Wolf and Sherman got 4 good players in 4 years of drafting. Carroll, Walker *who's leaving anyway*, Barnett and Kampman. Because of these horrible drafts the Packers have many glaring holes and in turn have a crappy team. You could minimize the bleeding today by filling the holes with over priced players but that would ultimately hurt the long term success of the team because those players are getting more than they are worth in relation to the league. The preferred option is to properly evaluate talent and draft well consistantly year after year. Keep yoru players to fair contracts like Wahle *was a mistake* and don't overspend on others. The reason I liek Thompson is because he beleives in building this way and I understand and agree with his direction. I do not know how he is going to do but based on his spoken direction I believe he will do well.

What makes you think Thompson will draft "consistently" for the next 4 or 5 years? His first draft produced only 1 quality starter, Collins, and when you take into account the fact that he had 11 picks, it does not show any sign of consistency.

What are the odds of success here? A proven vet who is reaching his prime like Hutchinson or an unproven rookie like DBrickshaw Ferguson? We know that Hutchinson can play in the NFL; We know nothing about Ferguson. So if you are using a risk analysis, it would be wiser and less risky to sign Hutchinson, especially if you have $35 mil, then draft an unproven player like Ferguson. Ferguson could turn out to be a Pace, or he could turn out to be a Manderich. We dont know. But we do know Hutchinson is an all pro.

What makes you think Thompson is a great talent evaluator? This is the same Polar Bear who signed Arturo Freeman, Klemm, Navies, Thompson, Little and traded Johnson to the rams for Thomas. This is the same guy who released Wahle and Sharper. This is the same Polar Bear who, with $35 mil, passed up on Hutchinson, Arrington, Bentley, Peterson, Archulete, among others.

When you have $35 mil you can also afford to front load contracts to sign players who are near the end of their prime but are still productive like Woodson. Front loading contracts mean less cap hits in the latter years since most of the hits take place during the first couple of years when you have money. Thus, no cap hell.

In the NFL today, you can go 5-11 one season and the win the Super Bowl the next. That is, if you upgrade your team and keeps your core players intact. If Pack was going to rebuild, we need not rebuild until Favre retires. The team Sherman handed Thompson last year was a winner, with only a few more players away from being a contender. However, Thompson dismantled that very team. Now the Packers have more holes than before.

4-12 is the work of Thompson. Thompson is inconsistent, incompetent, incapable, inactive and a polar bear.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

No risk, no reward?

Arrington didn't want to play in Green Bay, period. He said that early on, but he needed a team with cap space to lure a better contract. He had zero intention of siging here. If his decision was based on Favre, then we are even better off w/o him here. Favre is done after next year, no matter what. then we are stuck with a mega-contract and mega-headache.

Owens, he would have been nice, but he already is ruffling feathers in Dallas. I don't think signing Owens would have put us over the top for SB 41.

Hutchinson, he would have been a nice signing. It would have been poetic since he was picked with the draft choice Wolf sent to SEA for Jamal Reynolds. But we don't need high-priced guards for the zone blocking scheme. Why spend big bucks when you don't have to?

Take a breath, tank, breath deep...I'm not done yet.

LeBently, I would have dropped some cash for him. The center is important in any blocking scheme and he would have been good for us. Young, healthy, etc... But if we are outbid, then we lose out. TT can't make them sign here.

The other part of the equation is, do they fit in here? Dropping big bucks on some 'big' names doesn't ensure that they will perform like they did. Arrington didn't fit the scheme and he paid Washington to leave. Peterson was a headache for SF. Woodson, he was a primadonna who forced the other coach to get canned (the wisconsin guy, before Turner-blanking on his name). Why inherit their problem?

but seriously......Mike Sherman?

and don't even try to say things were good with Sherman. How many trophys did he produce? I think he picked one pro-bowl player in his drafts. You are going to defend the guy that gave Cletidus his meal-ticket, Johnson his ganga, BJ a 300G sideline job. Trading UP to the third-round for a PUNTER!!! The man who gave us Bhwo Jue, Robert Ferguson OVER Chris Chambers. The guy had serious man-love for Tyrone Davis. He gave Wahle that silly backloaded contract that forced us to cut him.

4th and 1..... I...I need some air.

If Arrington didnt want to play in Green Bay then thompson got used by Arrington's agents. Therefore he fucked up, since, according to you Arrington does not want to play in green bay, and Thompson wouldve been better off chasing Peterson. Boy, did Arrington phunked with Teddys heart.

Owens along may just be one player, but ownes combined with some of the other players i mentioned, along with 2 or 3 starters from the draft would make Pack a contender. The cap room was there to sign 3 or 4 marquee fa; thompson failed make it happen.

We have the money to sign Hutchinson. To say that we dont have to sign Hutchinson is idotic. Are you saying that Klemm or whitticker are better than Hutchinson. Are you saying that the Packs online is sound?

Drafting unproven rookies does not necessary mean they will eventually become leaders of the free world. Can you say Buckly, Leaf, Ki Jana Carter? It is better to have a still productive and proven vet than an unproven rookie.

As for Sherman, all i can say is: 12-4, 10-6, 10-6. you must be happy with 4-12.

[Scott Campbell]

This is the same Polar Bear who signed Arturo Freeman, Klemm, Navies, Thompson, Little and traded Johnson to the rams for Thomas.


Thompson signed Navies?

[jack's smirking revenge]

:evil: :twisted: :evil: :twisted:

I was just reviewing the NFL salary cap at March 10 and Green Bay was and probably is still at the top.

All Thompson could get thus far was Pickett, Manuel and that WR (what the hell is his name again). The fucking Giants have less money than GB and they still did outbid the Polar Bear for Arrington.

Talk about inefficient use of the cap. This is how the Polar Bear fucked up the Green Bay Packers. This is the Polar Bear being CHEAP. So many teams did more with far less money than the Packers, especially Washington.

Green Bay is obviously flawed in free agency because we have a flawed and fagged and fucked GM.


Team Cap status, March 10 (under)
Green Bay Packers $35 million
Minnesota Vikings $30.9 million
Arizona Cardinals $28.9 million
Cleveland Browns $27.1 million
Philadelphia Eagles $26.1 million
San Diego Chargers $24.6 million
Jacksonville Jaguars $23.4 million
Dallas Cowboys $22.6 million
St. Louis Rams $22.1 million
New Orleans Saints $20.2 million
San Francisco 49ers $20.2 million
Detroit Lions $17.7 million
Seattle Seahawks $17.3 million
New England Patriots $16.9 million
Cincinnati Bengals $16.6 million
Chicago Bears $14.9 million
Buffalo Bills $14.1 million
New York Jets $14 million
Houston Texans $12.7 million
Atlanta Falcons $12.2 million
Denver Broncos $10.9 million
Baltimore Ravens $10.6 million
Carolina Panthers $10.4 million
New York Giants $9.9 million
Kansas City Chiefs $7.3 million
Miami Dolphins $6.3 million
Tennessee Titans $6.2 million
Pittsburgh Steelers $6.1 million
Tampa Bay Buccaneers $5.1 million
Oakland Raiders $653,000
Indianapolis Colts ($5.9 million)
Washington Redskins ($4.9 million)

Pardon if this has already been mentioned, but didn't Arrington want to signe with the Giants to get some revenge on the Redskins (stay in the division). I don't think it mattered how much money we offered him.

tyler

[MJZiggy]

Sorry Jack, yes, that deceased horse has been thoroughly abused!

[mraynrand]

Anti-Polar Bear,

I understand your distain for TT. The simple fact is that Sherman and Thompson are polar opposites. Sherman was handed a ten year aging vet MVP QB and he did everthing in his power to protect the guy and play to win every year, including retaining his veterans (Particularly on the O-line), trading picks for guys who could play NOW (a #2 for Harris and two#4s for Glenn). The 2001 draft (FOR WHICH WOLF WAS RESPONSIBLE, but Sherman had input), killed the Packers long-term. Wolf had an incredible GM year in 2000 - with four solid draft picks and trading for Green. That, and Shermy going for broke, almost led to a championship in 2002. Without the injuries, the Packers would have cruised to homefield advantage and the Superbowl. Thompson came in and is relying strictly on the draft. I think he decided Favre was over the hill, that he didn't like Sherman and was going to completely rebuild. It's just that simple. How else can you possible justify letting three probowlers go in one year and letting your 14 year vet QB get abused? I think TT was secretly very happy the Packers were injured, as it made it a hell of a lot easier to clear out Shermy. But other guys around the league notice when you fire a guy that went to the playoff four straight years and never had a losing season til you arrived. That's why TT didn't get his guy Childress.

All that being said doesn't mean TT won't be a good to great GM. He has a solid history of very good drafting, and so far has one year of weak to poor pro personnel decisions in the bank. Only the future will tell whether he is an all-around good GM. He's learning the ropes just like Shermy had to do when he was thrown to the wolves (pun intended) and had to learn how to be a GM and coach in 2002.

[b bulldog]

Why do we need to post such filth?

[Scott Campbell]

Why do we need to post such filth?

"We" aren't. It's just one guy.

[swede]

Sorry Jack, yes, that deceased horse has been thoroughly abused!

Uh... that sounds like Murph talking, Zigg.

:smile:

[swede]

... Sherman was handed a ten year aging vet MVP QB and he did everthing in his power to protect the guy and play to win every year, including retaining his veterans (Particularly on the O-line), trading picks for guys who could play NOW (a #2 for Harris and two#4s for Glenn). The 2001 draft (FOR WHICH WOLF WAS RESPONSIBLE, but Sherman had input), killed the Packers long-term. Wolf had an incredible GM year in 2000 - with four solid draft picks and trading for Green. That, and Shermy going for broke, almost led to a championship in 2002. Without the injuries, the Packers would have cruised to homefield advantage and the Superbowl. Thompson came in and is relying strictly on the draft. I think he decided Favre was over the hill, that he didn't like Sherman and was going to completely rebuild. It's just that simple. How else can you possible justify letting three probowlers go in one year and letting your 14 year vet QB get abused? I think TT was secretly very happy the Packers were injured, as it made it a hell of a lot easier to clear out Shermy. But other guys around the league notice when you fire a guy that went to the playoff four straight years and never had a losing season til you arrived. That's why TT didn't get his guy Childress...

Mraynrand,

You are a veritable fountainhead of good sense. You win an Optimistic Realists lapel pin and your name will be entered into the Optimistic Realists Annual Who's Who Directory, a copy of which can be purchased for $59.95. (Make checks payable to Harlan Huckleby, I can handle cash orders.)

I am very happy that TT didn't get to hire Childress. That guy makes Mike Sherman look like an Army Ranger.

[Scott Campbell]

Sorry Jack, yes, that deceased horse has been thoroughly abused!

Uh... let's maybe keep talk like this...............................


Swede, check you pm's.

[mraynrand]

You are a veritable fountainhead of good sense. You win an Optimistic Realists lapel pin and your name will be entered into the Optimistic Realists Annual Who's Who Directory, a copy of which can be purchased for $59.95. (Make checks payable to Harlan Huckleby, I can handle cash orders.)


Can I get a copy for half-price? I'm a capitalist and I'm always looking for the best deal I can get. You should be asking for whatever price the traffic can bear.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Pardon if this has already been mentioned, but didn't Arrington want to signe with the Giants to get some revenge on the Redskins (stay in the division). I don't think it mattered how much money we offered him.

tyler

If Thompson knew Arrington didnt want to play in Green Bay why did he waste his time with him? Why not persue Peterson, or another LB instead?

This is where Thompson fucked up: chasing a LB who did not want to play for him, while another signed else where.

If you tell me that Peterson doesnt want to play in Green Bay also, then we have an issue here: nobody of exceptional talant want to play for our stinking GM.

Might it, then, be wise to bring in a GM who players like Wahle, Hutchinson, Woodson, would be willing to play for?

I mean $35 mil and only Pickett, Manuel and that WR is unacceptable. Mike Sherman wouldve done more with all that cash. Hell, Mike Sherman did more with less than the 7.5 mil thompson had last year.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Gimme a little while. I'll have to look it up again after dinner, but I warn you, it exists.

MJ, still waiting for evidence of how Sharper got Sherman fired.

[MJZiggy]

I knew you would be. I can't remember the context of the article (and actually it might have been McKenzie--it was one of those fiascos) but I will dig it up and post it for you. I'm just not making it a full-time job right now.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

I knew you would be. I can't remember the context of the article (and actually it might have been McKenzie--it was one of those fiascos) but I will dig it up and post it for you. I'm just not making it a full-time job right now.

there isnt an article, so you wont find anything.

[Partial]

How many super bowls did Charmin win?

[MJZiggy]

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=292988http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=292988

Here it is, though it was Mike McKenzie and it was midseason game prep, but clearly Harlan thought he wasn't handling things.

Here's a highlight for you:

If he wouldn't have been able to lure Ted Thompson to be his general manager, Green Bay Packers President Bob Harlan would have been staring at an empty seat in a luxurious new office inside Lambeau Field with no options to fill it.

That's how strongly Harlan felt he needed to separate the head coach's and general manager's duties in his front office and how strongly he felt Thompson should assume one of them.

Had Thompson turned him down, Harlan had no ready alternative to fill the GM spot and would have had to conduct a long search. But early Friday morning, after about nine hours of negotiations between lawyers for both parties, Thompson agreed to a five-year deal to become the team's 10th general manager.

"I knew it would have posed a problem if he said no," Harlan said. "I would really be concerned who I would turn to."

"I think Ted's matured a great deal in the last five years," Harlan said. "I think he's put together the scouting staff in Seattle, run the drafts, and I think he's become a much more efficient personnel guy in the last five years. He's grown in these 13 years. His career has progressed, and I think he's one of the better personnel people in the league.

Said Wolf: "That's a great hire. He's the right man for the job."

Sherman's regular-season record of 53-27 is the fifth-best over the first five years of a coaching career since the NFL-AFL merger in 1970, but his drafts and free-agent signings were fraught with mistakes. Harlan was concerned that the dual role was taking away from Sherman's ability to coach the team.

A meticulous and tireless worker, Sherman poured all his energy into his job, and Harlan said he started to sense that the head man was spreading himself too thin. Never a fan of the dual coach-general manager arrangement for one man, Harlan became concerned when a general manager from another team spoke of seeing Sherman at every off-season scouting event, regardless of its insignificance.

Harlan said he basically came to his decision to relieve Sherman of the general manager's duties when he saw him agonizing over the situation involving cornerback Mike McKenzie. A holdout all of training camp, McKenzie reported the second week of the season with the intention only of getting traded.

The weekend before the New York Giants game on Oct. 3, Sherman was dealing with a complicated McKenzie issue while preparing for the game. Harlan met with Sherman the day before the game and saw how distracted he was.

"All he talked about was the difficult situation he was having with McKenzie's agent and the difficult situation he was having with the New Orleans Saints trying to make a trade," Harlan said. "And I thought, 'You know, with a big game coming up tomorrow, we need to be focused in. Somebody else can do these things.' "

italics are mine.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

It was McKenzie, not Sharper.

Sharper didn’t got Sherman fired.

The McKenzie fiasco was a no win situation for Sherman. All said, firing Sherman as GM was a mistake. 4-12 is all the evidence you need. Instead of relieving Sherman, Harlan shouldve allowed Sherman to a hired right hand man similarly to Mark Hatly. Sherman didn’t have Hatly in 04 due to his unexpected death.

[MJZiggy]

You obviously missed the part in the article about the numerous draft mistakes that also played a part in his dismissal and I SAID before I found it that I might have had the wrong player fiasco, and it might have been McK.