A BIT OF GLASS HALF EMPTY FACTS AND PERCEIVED REALITY

[Bretsky]

We are 12-20 over the last two years

For the most part we have done very little to improve an offense through free agency in the last two years.

We do seem to have shored up our defense very nicely through free agency and the draft and they should be a strong unit going forward.

Our record against playoff teams last year was 1-6, and even that win seemed like it was against a team who was waiting for their game two weeks later. We were outscored 205-96 in the games against playoff teams

The two games that stick out in my mind that told me we still had a ways to go were against two teams a step down from being playoff caliber in Buffalo and the Rams. We competed against both but fell short.

We ended the season 4-0. Three of those wins came against teams with higher draft picks. The fourth against a team not bringing their A game.

We've lost our best RB in Ahman Green. We've added somebody to compete for a 3rd or 4th CB on our roster. On paper, at least, we are weaker than last year's squad.

Our young players will improve. However, there is no guarantee that our players will improve any more than our oppositions young players.

We made a great signing with Nick Barnett. We frontloaded that deal some to make it's way into this coming year's cap. That sets us up for more flexibility in the future, but less flexibility for free agenty signings this year.

We are depending on the draft, and we will have to put our faith in Ted Thompson to make some wonderful decisions on 4/28 to have any real chance at the playoffs next year.

His 2006 draft would seem to be a gem while his 2005 draft is still very much up in the air.

This year's schedule is a heck of a lot tougher that last year's IMO.

Our non conference schedule includes very tough matchups against contenders like San Diego, Dallas, Denver, Philadelphia, and pretty tough matchups against KC, Carolina, the Giants, and St Louis. On the brighter side we do get the Raiders and Washington (who could be improved).

To me, what all this adds up to is Green Bay being an average team next year.

I sure hope I'm wrong.









I

[oregonpackfan]

From a logical perspective, you make some strong points, Bretsky.

In the world of sports, however, things happen that ofen send a team up or down in the W-L column--injuries, team chemistry, officiating calls, strange bounces in the ball, etc. These variables are what make sports seasons so interesting.

[KYPack]

My brother and I had a Packer conversation that came to just about the same conclusions as your post, B.

Both of us reached the conclusion that we needed to keep improving the roster. if we were to have another 8-8 record, it would be an improvement based on the stronger schedule this year.

The big fear is that we may be poised for a strong '08, & still have the same worries about 4's retirement. Maybe Rodgers will be a factor by then, who knows?

[gbgary]

all this adds up to is Green Bay being an average team next year.

I sure hope I'm wrong.

well...i think you are wrong but not by much. i think you're "average team" comment is a "glass is half full" prayer. when i saw who we were playing this year i knew we we'd be picking in the top ten in '08. the only thing to look forward to this year is brett putting marino in 2nd. 5-11 maybe 6-10.

[esoxx]

Nice post Bretsky and reality says this team is still lacking big time on offense. Unless you have a defense like the '00 Ravens, offensive ineptitude will eventuallly erode overall team confidence and undermines the season.

TT needs to step it up on the offensive side and get it done. Hopefully the draft brings relief, but it usually isn't immediate.

Let's put it this way, I be much more surprised if this team went 12-4 versus 4-12.

[Joemailman]

Just a couple "glass half full" comments. While it is true that all teams expect their young players to improve, the Packers have more to gain from an improvement of young players than other teams. The Packers started 4-5 rookies every game last year, an unheard of number, as well as 2 more 2nd year players. All those players, if they are to be quality players, should be much improved this year.

I don't agree with the hand wringing about the schedule. You just don't know which teams are going to improve, and which teams are going to decline. Who could have predicted that 2 of the Packers toughest games last year would be against the Saints and the Jets? Some of the tough teams you mentioned on the schedule are teams that, unlike the Packers, faded in the 2nd half of last year. Some of them may not be as tough this year as you think.

Finally, I think the Packers will benefit from having all the players (other than rookies) and coaches being more familiar with each other, and with the systems they are trying to execute. There was a lot of on-the-job training last year, and that will not be the case this year.

[esoxx]

I don't agree with the hand wringing about the schedule. You just don't know which teams are going to improve, and which teams are going to decline. Who could have predicted that 2 of the Packers toughest games last year would be against the Saints and the Jets? Some of the tough teams you mentioned on the schedule are teams that, unlike the Packers, faded in the 2nd half of last year. Some of them may not be as tough this year as you think.



Yeah, we all know you can't really predict how teams shake out but you can tell some things that are tried and true:

KC & Denver are bitches to play on the road and their home records bear it out. Playing them back to back is brutal.

Typically never play well at Dallas.

Typically don't play well in domes (St. Louis).

Even at Detroit, they get a lift this year against the Pack b/c it's on Turkey day. That means we get one day of practice that week while they get two. Not saying Detroit wins but there is a built-in advantage to it.

Our December home games: Oakland & Detroit. Wow, now that's when we need that Artic assist. Would have preferred them early in season and bring in teams like SD and Carolina late.

Schedule makers did us absolutely no favors this year.

[LEWCWA]

Looking at the roster now I have to agree, but how would you view this thing with a young 1200 yard rusher and adding a 75 catch 1100 yards and 10tds from Randy Moss? I know both are pure speculation, but if we add Lynch and Moss to this offense I believe our chances improve greatly to compete for the playoffs.

[BallHawk]

Who wants to start a "Glass Half Full of Kool-Aid" thread?
:D

[Packnut]

Thompson is gonna take the slow methodical approach no matter how painfull it is to the fans. He's gonna draft guys and throw em into the fire. I respect anyone who has a plan even though I totally dis-agree with it. I just really wish he'd stop treating us like idiots by telling us how everything is fine and about how much talent we have. The results on the field do not match his "vision" of where this team really is.

[b bulldog]

We beat one team with a winning record and that team had nothing to play for. I predict 8-8 this season and this 8-8 will be lgit with victories over good teams and 08 will be the next playoff appearance for our Packers. We weren't as good as our record ended up last season IMO.

[retailguy]

Bretsky, I'm gonna sue you for stealing all my material.

This is exactly what I've been saying for many months now. How is it that everyone agrees with you and thinks I'm some negative fear monger? :roll:

No one wants to see the Packers win more than I do, but I just can't figure out how that's possible. That being said, NO ONE with half a brain thought the Patriots could win in 2001 either, and looking back, that one looks pretty good. So, in truth, you never know. Surprises happen, however, they don't happen frequently.

I fear we are in for a year of mediocrity, I also fear that the record won't be as good as last season, that being said, I'll consider the year a success if we somehow start playing good hard competitive football against the many good teams we play. That'll be progress for me. There are days that I wonder if competitive football is even possible. Today is not one, feel pretty good about that this week.

Looking forward to the draft, but still wondering who is going to run the damn ball....

[ZachMN]

If we had the money, were the FA's that were available going to put us over the top? No. Just because there is money and people available doesn't mean there is a match there. The Colts team was built with the draft. Case closed. When the Right players are in FA for your team you get them. These threads sound like theyr are written by mall rats with momma's credit card -There's something I want!!! BUY IT!! like Denny Green said bullshit BULLSHIT go Ted Thompson I'm in.

I fixed some punctuation........

[retailguy]

If we had the money, were the FA's that were available going to put us over the top? No. Just because there is money and people available doesn't mean there is a match there. The Colts team was built with the draft. Case closed. When the Right players are in FA for your team you get them. These threads sound like theyr are written by mall rats with momma's credit card -There's something I want!!! BUY IT!! like Denny Green said bullshit BULLSHIT go Ted Thompson I'm in.

I fixed some punctuation........

Ok, well, where to start?

1. We had the money, more money than just a couple of teams to do anything we damn well pleased.
2. No clear cut winners in FA that would put us over the top.
3. Had we retained Green, signed Justin Griffith as competition at FB, signed another TE to compete with Bubba Franks, then found a WR (Darrell Jackson perhaps?), do you think there might just be a FEW LESS HOLES on the offense?

4. Now, at this point, you can draft the "best available player", and really utilize that person, instead of trying to "fill a hole" for the 2007 season.

Was anyone going to make us favorites for the Super Bowl? Hell No. Were players available at fair prices to make us a better team in 2007? Hell Yes. And within the "constraints" of a common sense budget too.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

If we had the money, were the FA's that were available going to put us over the top? No. Just because there is money and people available doesn't mean there is a match there. The Colts team was built with the draft. Case closed. When the Right players are in FA for your team you get them. These threads sound like theyr are written by mall rats with momma's credit card -There's something I want!!! BUY IT!! like Denny Green said bullshit BULLSHIT go Ted Thompson I'm in.

I fixed some punctuation........

Ok, well, where to start?

1. We had the money, more money than just a couple of teams to do anything we damn well pleased.
2. No clear cut winners in FA that would put us over the top.
3. Had we retained Green, signed Justin Griffith as competition at FB, signed another TE to compete with Bubba Franks, then found a WR (Darrell Jackson perhaps?), do you think there might just be a FEW LESS HOLES on the offense?

4. Now, at this point, you can draft the "best available player", and really utilize that person, instead of trying to "fill a hole" for the 2007 season.

Was anyone going to make us favorites for the Super Bowl? Hell No. Were players available at fair prices to make us a better team in 2007? Hell Yes. And within the "constraints" of a common sense budget too.

OK am confused now. You wanted to sign Green? So why did you give me hell when I said the team should of signed him. And don't tell me it's because I said I love TT in that other post (when I was clearly referring to him not signing guards to big money.) Also, except for Moss we have pretty much the same thoughts.

[Charles Woodson]

If we had the money, were the FA's that were available going to put us over the top? No. Just because there is money and people available doesn't mean there is a match there. The Colts team was built with the draft. Case closed. When the Right players are in FA for your team you get them. These threads sound like theyr are written by mall rats with momma's credit card -There's something I want!!! BUY IT!! like Denny Green said bullshit BULLSHIT go Ted Thompson I'm in.

I fixed some punctuation........


Its not about trying to put yourself over the top in one free agency. I mean were not the redskins. But i agree with Bretsky and RG because like RG said there were some players in FA that most likely could have started for us this year. Who knows what the draft will bring, i think TT puts way to much faith in it. TT is just missing his balance between the both of them. I guess what im trying to say is there were players that would have helped us. I just would rather had TT put up at least more fight in FA

[Joemailman]

I don't think Thompson is relying on this year's draft to fill holes as much as some of you think. I think he is expecting young players like Collins, Underwood, Blackmon, Poppinga, Jenkins, Hodge, Lee, Colledge, Spitz, jennings and Morency to have a bigger impact this year. We'll see if he's right. I wouldn't look for the Packers to have 4 rookies in the starting lineup on opening day like they did last year.

[retailguy]

I don't think Thompson is relying on this year's draft to fill holes as much as some of you think. I think he is expecting young players like Collins, Underwood, Blackmon, Poppinga, Jenkins, Hodge, Lee, Colledge, Spitz, jennings and Morency to have a bigger impact this year. We'll see if he's right. I wouldn't look for the Packers to have 4 rookies in the starting lineup on opening day like they did last year.

I wouldn't look for lots of rookies to be starting either, that's not the point.

I also don't think it is a "reasonable" assumption to expect all or even most to have a big impact. I think that is also shortsighted.

This comment really, when you think about it, backs up my points above. You bring in "moderately" priced free agents to provide competition at spots where you can, lessening the risk you place on young guys who can't/won't step up.

If they step up, great, you let the free agent go, if they don't, you don't have as many holes to fill.

[MJZiggy]

But then you've necessarily paid for a player that you won't be utilizing...

[retailguy]

But then you've necessarily paid for a player that you won't be utilizing...

True, to a point. At some level all 53 guys get utilized. Some more than others.

Point is, you can't remove risk. If you don't pay some guys, you wind up, as we did last year, with holes. Manuel did not play well, and there wasn't much healthy depth behind him as a fallback. Thats just one example.

[MJZiggy]

But you said if the kid steps up, you let the free agent go. That's a lot of money to let a middle of the road free agent walk. Not that we haven't done it, but I'm just saying. I just wanna see what happens after the draft.

[retailguy]

But you said if the kid steps up, you let the free agent go. That's a lot of money to let a middle of the road free agent walk. Not that we haven't done it, but I'm just saying. I just wanna see what happens after the draft.


Well, I agree with that, EXCEPT, if your plan doesn't work out, then WHERE do you get the guy? They tried that last year, and there wasn't much left.

sometimes you gotta get the guy when he's available... The FB or TE, would have been utilized. Miree is OK, but just a guy. Bubba is appearing to be "over the hill". There was little risk there Zig.

[Joemailman]

I don't think Thompson is relying on this year's draft to fill holes as much as some of you think. I think he is expecting young players like Collins, Underwood, Blackmon, Poppinga, Jenkins, Hodge, Lee, Colledge, Spitz, jennings and Morency to have a bigger impact this year. We'll see if he's right. I wouldn't look for the Packers to have 4 rookies in the starting lineup on opening day like they did last year.

I wouldn't look for lots of rookies to be starting either, that's not the point.

I also don't think it is a "reasonable" assumption to expect all or even most to have a big impact. I think that is also shortsighted.

This comment really, when you think about it, backs up my points above. You bring in "moderately" priced free agents to provide competition at spots where you can, lessening the risk you place on young guys who can't/won't step up.

If they step up, great, you let the free agent go, if they don't, you don't have as many holes to fill.

I think I read not too long ago that the Packers already have more guys under contract than any other team. I mean, you can only bring so many guys into camp. Not to mention the fact that TT usually ends up drafting more guys than most teams.

[Bretsky]

If we had the money, were the FA's that were available going to put us over the top? No. Just because there is money and people available doesn't mean there is a match there. The Colts team was built with the draft. Case closed. When the Right players are in FA for your team you get them. These threads sound like theyr are written by mall rats with momma's credit card -There's something I want!!! BUY IT!! like Denny Green said bullshit BULLSHIT go Ted Thompson I'm in.

I fixed some punctuation........


I want to puke everytime the "over the top" argument comes up. It's a process, and the over the top argument is the classic cliche to defend TT from making moves to improve the talent on the roster.

[Bretsky]

If we had the money, were the FA's that were available going to put us over the top? No. Just because there is money and people available doesn't mean there is a match there. The Colts team was built with the draft. Case closed. When the Right players are in FA for your team you get them. These threads sound like theyr are written by mall rats with momma's credit card -There's something I want!!! BUY IT!! like Denny Green said bullshit BULLSHIT go Ted Thompson I'm in.

I fixed some punctuation........


Its not about trying to put yourself over the top in one free agency. I mean were not the redskins. But i agree with Bretsky and RG because like RG said there were some players in FA that most likely could have started for us this year. Who knows what the draft will bring, i think TT puts way to much faith in it. TT is just missing his balance between the both of them. I guess what im trying to say is there were players that would have helped us. I just would rather had TT put up at least more fight in FA

:bow: :bow:

[retailguy]

I think I read not too long ago that the Packers already have more guys under contract than any other team. I mean, you can only bring so many guys into camp. Not to mention the fact that TT usually ends up drafting more guys than most teams.


I'm looking for help in 07, Joe. All those "bodies" don't help much for that.

[retailguy]

I want to puke everytime the "over the top" argument comes up. It's a process, and the over the top argument is the classic cliche to defend TT from making moves to improve the talent on the roster.


gotta drink the kool-aid man! How dare you criticize him. He doin' the right thing...

We got good guys on the roster... Thompson is a draftin' animal. You'll see!

:roll: :wink:

[LaFours]

If we had the money, were the FA's that were available going to put us over the top? No. Just because there is money and people available doesn't mean there is a match there. The Colts team was built with the draft. Case closed. When the Right players are in FA for your team you get them. These threads sound like theyr are written by mall rats with momma's credit card -There's something I want!!! BUY IT!! like Denny Green said bullshit BULLSHIT go Ted Thompson I'm in.

I fixed some punctuation........

Some of us are Mall Rats. Your tone does not resonate pleasantly on this issue.

[Zool]

:beat: :beat: :beat: :beat:

This horse has started to decompose its been dead so long.

[swede]

...I think the Packers will benefit from having all the players (other than rookies) and coaches being more familiar with each other, and with the systems they are trying to execute. There was a lot of on-the-job training last year, and that will not be the case this year.

My glass half empty thought is that this is the year we may find out that the offensive and defensive systems are more mediocre than the players.

I don't have a big problem with the slow spending in FA. The really good players got paid and are staying with their teams. The average guys, the trouble in the lockerroom guys, the 30+ year old guys, and the oft-injured guys are gettting paid too much by teams that aren't us. (I would have like the FB Griffith and a TE. I support that particular beef regarding this year's FA period.)

RG and Bretsky keep up the good posting. I hardly agree with any of it when it comes to the you know better than TT regarding Free Agency angles, but I come here to listen to other POV.

[ZachMN]

The point is maybe we didn't blow our wad of cash on talent that will

A: Cause dissension in the locker room

B: Put us at a disadvantage next year when better FA are available

C: Don't even go there about Green he couldn't even practice all week last year and it is a fact after x amount of carries you go DOWN; mark my words he will be out at least four games for Houston this year


Whine about how TT is no good for not spending the money; we don't have that much and we need to spend it on our own players who are on the right side of their careers not the wrong side; Houston OVERPAID for Green, we offered him a decent fair amount and signing Barnett was a way smarter move. Things like that prove that TT is on the right track.

I understand now that some of us want to get people to start right away but every year there are new players who step up that no one thought was any good-maybe we can have one or two of those guys.

We are getting younger, hungrier players who understand that there is no sentimental value allowing them to start for us. That is a very good thing.

[woodbuck27]

This whole situation of has TT done right or wrong for the Packers 2007 is more like a bad divorce. With people looking at him and her and finding one way him and the other for 'the Lady'.

What bugs the 'H' out of me.

1. What about players like Favre and Donald Driver?

Players who remain as the main sentries against total embarassment in this very difficult coming season.

2. What about knowledgeable or dedicated Packer fans?

3. What about those fans that live Packers every day. Fans that see ways (maybe plenty of ways) to strengthen OUR team; fans that are often (not always) frustrated by a GM that does diddly squat to stem the tide in terms of acquisitions that are affordable and seemingly upgrades.

4. Packer Fans that have to put up with a GM that has a one tier plan to strengthen the team. The draft. When they fully realize that isn't the total answer.

5.and the WORST.

Packer fans that have to put up with a GM that chooses to use the same tired rhetoric that says nothing or is even insulting, to justify his inactivity.

Statements of justification for possible perceived failure or directions that are often 'ME' based.

[ZachMN]

Inactivity?? That is your perception; he has been trying whether or not you choose to accept it. Sometimes we will get the free agents sometimes they want too much money and go elsewhere. Green is a perfect example- he was offered a TON of money to go to Houston in fact weren't we in the running until the end. Would you have given him that much money to stay(match Houston's offer)? Would that have been smart?

[Bretsky]

Inactivity?? That is your perception; he has been trying whether or not you choose to accept it. Sometimes we will get the free agents sometimes they want too much money and go elsewhere. Green is a perfect example- he was offered a TON of money to go to Houston in fact weren't we in the running until the end. Would you have given him that much money to stay(match Houston's offer)? Would that have been smart?


How hard he tried in free agency is debatable and we really don't know. But we can formulate opinions on whether he's getting it done or not.

To answer your second question, there are not many in here that would have matched Houston's offer.

However, some of us would have put forth our best offer before free agency rather than waiting til Green received a far superior offer than TT originally gave.

[The Shadow]

Personally. I'd rather have a solid team that is built for the long haul, and that is done through the draft.
I'm not impatient; I think the Packer team is being assembled the correct way.