Just a Few Opinions

[The Shadow]

Ok : this is the calm before the storm of the new season. None of us know for certain what will transpire in training camp or the months beyond - all the dramas, large & small, have yet to be played out. All of our beliefs about the health & prospects of our favorite team, which have often collided violently on this forum, really mean very little at this point - only when the season unfolds will we see what's what.
Still, I thought it might be interesting to express a few core opinions about the state of the team -now, before things really get underway. It's always a bit difficult to get a real handle on where most posters stand on the overall view when they are only responding to a specific topic.

1. The Green Bay Packers : the greatest team in sports. What a pleasure : to be a Packer fan, through thick & thin.
2. Ted Thompson : Some have accused me of being a blind supporter - I wish to plead not guilty. Here's what I think : I believe Thompson inherited a team on the downside. The Packers were not a bad team by any stretch - they were just good enough to be playoff contenders - but never good enough to really have legitimate Super Bowl aspirations. For several years management's approach had been to patch and repatch increasing holes.
He -to his credit - took the tougher road, inviting fan's howls, and began rebuilding the team from the foundation up. The process is not yet complete, but I think the team is unmistakeably headed in the right direction.
Have I liked all his moves? No. Do I think -overall - his moves are sound. Yes.
3. Mike McCarthy : Way too early to accurately judge him as a coach. Now, he's gotten his feet wet; this season will reveal a lot. Early impressions - I like his approach. I think the Packers are now a tougher group than they were in the past, and I think that can be linked directly to the head coach.
4. Staff : Boy, I just don't know! Who can tell how Joe Philben will do? I'm still a bit wary of Sanders, and I don't see how Shottenheimer kept his job. On the plus side, I like Moss and Campen, and think the addition of Fontenot could be a big plus.
5. Brett Favre : I like Favre, I admire Favre, and I think his durability record is one of the most remarkable in sports. That being said, I think way too much attention is placed on him - often at the expense of the team. The whole 'we have to win for Brett' clamor is in the long run detrimental to the overall wellbeing of the Packers. If #4 is a member of a sound Packers team - great. If he sets all the records in the world with a patched-together team that never really goes anywhere, I'm not at all interested.
6. Mike Sherman : I thought Sherman had many good qualities, but besides his dismal record as a GM, several deficiencies doomed him. One was obvious : he seemed to consistently get outcoached in big games. For me, there were other, more subtle, troubling signs : his teams never seemed to be fired up (the Packers sideline always looked embarrassingly listless), his stubborn reliance on mediocre Tom Rossley and a comment made by a departing coach, who indicated Mike's micromanaging style had gotten to the point where "meetings were being called solely to plan other meetings".
During Sherman's last season, he reminded me strongly of Captain Queeg, minus the steel ball bearings.
7. The Roster : I like it. Young players with what appears to be plenty of upside. Are there holes? Surely - every team has them. But the young additions to that offensive line, the addition of a cornerstone defender like Hawk , a receiver with moxie like Jennings, etc, etc. are all positive signs.
8. The Season Ahead : I think this will be a great year. Are we there yet? No. But what a blast to watch the young team continue to develop. Instead of praying an aging Packer team can hold things together for one more year, it will be great to watch a team growing towards championship-level caliber.

[Bretsky]

Great post Shadow, and stated in a way in which nearly everybody (pro TT and anti TT) will, I think, agree with.

I too have concerns about Sanders and Schottenheimer; Sanders looked like he was a lame duck before we began our stint against three horrid offenses.
But we also switched Jenkins to DE at that point too so it will be interesting to see if Sanders again looks over his head at times.

[oregonpackfan]

Shadow,

I think you make many strong and insightful points.

IMO, you were not critical enough of Mike Sherman. Personally, I have nothing against Sherman. Character and integrity wise, I believe he is a good man.

That said, as a head coach, Sherman was over his head. As a GM, he was abysmal, particularly in his draft selection abilitiies. About the only GM in the NFL who was as incompetant as Sherman is Matt Millan of the Lions.

Because Sherman had both the HC and GM titles, the Packers took a significant spiral downwards. Tompson and McCarthy still need a full season, perhaps two more seasons, to undo all the many mistakes Sherman made.

Again, I bear no personal malice against Sherman. He was just the wrong man for both positions. He best functions as an assistant coach.

[Harlan Huckleby]

rebuilding the team from the foundation up. The process is not yet complete

He's been a GM for 3 years. Three mulligans is max in era of free agency. I don't know the stats, but I would guess that a typical NFL team turns-over half their roster every 4 years (just a guess). EVERY team is cosntantly rebuilding, to a great extent.

[Scott Campbell]

rebuilding the team from the foundation up. The process is not yet complete

He's been a GM for 3 years.


Thompson got hired in Jan of 05. He won't have 3 years in until after this season is over.

But I see what you're saying. He doesn't have forever, and is reaching a point where expectations need to get ratcheted up.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I was counting dog years.

[Bretsky]

rebuilding the team from the foundation up. The process is not yet complete

He's been a GM for 3 years.


Thompson got hired in Jan of 05. He won't have 3 years in until after this season is over.

But I see what you're saying. He doesn't have forever, and is reaching a point where expectations need to get ratcheted up.


On other hand he has had three free agent periods as well as three drafts to stock youth on this roster

[MJZiggy]

I was counting dog years.

For Michael Vick?

[GBRulz]

Zig, who is that in your avatar?

[MJZiggy]

Henry Garza from LLB. I took that last night.

[Packnut]

Season 3 will tell us all we need to know about where we're headed. I expect no blow outs this season and a much better effort at Lambeau. I expect an appropriate amount of improvement in the young guys Thompson has brought in. All any fan can ask for is a team that competes hard every down.


For some reason I have a very strong gut feeling about our defense. I expect a shut-down in your face unit. But as great as I feel about the D, I feel just the opposite about this offense.

In any event, it's almost time to start finding out the answers........

[oregonpackfan]

Henry Garza from LLB. I took that last night.

Engaging in a little fantasizing, MJ? :)

We male posters hardly ever fantasize about members of the opposite sex! :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

On other hand he has had three free agent periods..........


Only if you count the first year when Sherman had already spent all Ted's money. I can't hold that against Ted.

[MJZiggy]

Henry Garza from LLB. I took that last night.

Engaging in a little fantasizing, MJ? :)

We male posters hardly ever fantasize about members of the opposite sex! :lol:

I used his face, and he's fully clothed...somehow I detect a minor difference in fantasies there...Do note that he's looking right at me when I took the shot... :oops:

[Scott Campbell]

Do note that he's looking right at me when I took the shot... :oops:


Somebody sounds a little smitten.

[MJZiggy]

I thought everyone already knew of my undying devotion to Henry... 8-)

[Scott Campbell]

I thought everyone already knew of my undying devotion to Henry... 8-)


Uh ohhhhhh.........tell me you didn't go Tom Jones on the guy and throw your undies up there.

[Scott Campbell]

....a backstage pass......
...a few too many cocktails to wash down the guacamole dip............


We get the picture Zigs. :wink:

[MJZiggy]

I thought everyone already knew of my undying devotion to Henry... 8-)


Uh ohhhhhh.........tell me you didn't go Tom Jones on the guy and throw your undies up there.

Damn. I didn't think of that...

[Bretsky]

I thought everyone already knew of my undying devotion to Henry... 8-)

Who the hell is Henry ? Hank Aaron ?

We only know of your undying devotion to the Snapper.

Other than that many of us probably have not heard of this yahoo


Cheers,
B

[Noodle]

On other hand he has had three free agent periods..........


Only if you count the first year when Sherman had already spent all Ted's money. I can't hold that against Ted.

Just imagine the magic he would have done in FA if only he'd had the cash.

Ok, sorry, that was snarky, and I take your point. But this really does have to be the year we see some significant improvement of the team.

What I find a little worrisome is that in league-wide ratings of different units (LBs, WRs, RBs, TEs, etc), folks consistently rank the Pack in the middle to bottom of the pack.

A lot of times those raters don't know squat, but, as much as I like a lot of our guys, I don't think they stack up well talent-wise with other teams in the league. That's on TT. Especially when you look at the so-called "playmaker" positions, we are going to have to hope that a bunch of very young guys, inlcuding rooks like Jackson, play lights out.

[Bretsky]

On other hand he has had three free agent periods..........


Only if you count the first year when Sherman had already spent all Ted's money. I can't hold that against Ted.

Just imagine the magic he would have done in FA if only he'd had the cash.

Ok, sorry, that was snarky, and I take your point. But this really does have to be the year we see some significant improvement of the team.

What I find a little worrisome is that in league-wide ratings of different units (LBs, WRs, RBs, TEs, etc), folks consistently rank the Pack in the middle to bottom of the pack.

A lot of times those raters don't know squat, but, as much as I like a lot of our guys, I don't think they stack up well talent-wise with other teams in the league. That's on TT. Especially when you look at the so-called "playmaker" positions, we are going to have to hope that a bunch of very young guys, inlcuding rooks like Jackson, play lights out.



AMEN; but if you'd ask TT he'd say we're just fine there and improvement will come from within.

Wait, whose to say our young guys develop and improve more than the rest of the young guys on teams in the NFL ?

We better hope they do.

Judges will be out soon in 07

[the_idle_threat]

A lot of times those raters don't know squat, but, as much as I like a lot of our guys, I don't think they stack up well talent-wise with other teams in the league. That's on TT. Especially when you look at the so-called "playmaker" positions, we are going to have to hope that a bunch of very young guys, inlcuding rooks like Jackson, play lights out.

According to Favre's comments last year at around this time, he might disagree with you. :D

How do you measure the talent of our young guys vs. other teams in the league? Is that even possible? Perhaps our guys have as much talent as players on other teams, but---because they're generally young---they just don't have the same level of accomplishment in the league.

I think that offseason ratings by railbirds in the sports media (or on message boards like ours) tend to focus more on accomplishments than on talent itself. That's fair when rating past performance. It's much less accurate, IMO, when looking to the future.

Guys who have been around long enough to become "accomplished" in the league are also guys who are old enough to be either peaked out or on the decline. Looking forward, do you want to pay premium prices for guys who are probably gonna stay the same or get worse on your team, or do you want guys who need a chance and are young enough to have a lot of upside?

Of course, I don't know that this is the reality of what our young players will do. Perhaps they are lacking accomplishment, and---if given a chance---they will still manage to accomplish nothing.

But it's certainly another way to look at things, and something tells me it's closer to the way TT looks at things. He didn't sign all these young guys after open tryouts in a McDonald's parking lot. They're football players too, even if they aren't household names.

And to address Bretsky's question of how we can expect our young guys to improve more than young guys on other teams ... I don't think that is the expectation at all.

The expectation is that this team has more young guys in key roles than most other teams do (maybe even the youngest roster in the league?), so even if all the young guys in the entire league improve at the same rate, that still means our generally younger roster improves more than another team's roster where more of the players are older and are peaked out or even on the decline.

[Bretsky]

And to address Bretsky's question of how we can expect our young guys to improve more than young guys on other teams ... I don't think that is the expectation at all.

The expectation is that this team has more young guys in key roles than most other teams do (maybe even the youngest roster in the league?), so even if all the young guys in the entire league improve at the same rate, that still means our generally younger roster improves more than another team's roster where more of the players are older and are peaked out or even on the decline.


Honestly that's a very valid explanation, and I've asked the same question many times in here. It may or may not turn out to be true, but kudos to you for explaining it. We are certainly younger than most teams so the hope would be that they would improve and improve now faster than the rest seeing we did not use free agency as a tool like some of our competitors did.

[4and12to12and4]

5. Brett Favre : I like Favre, I admire Favre, and I think his durability record is one of the most remarkable in sports. That being said, I think way too much attention is placed on him - often at the expense of the team. The whole 'we have to win for Brett' clamor is in the long run detrimental to the overall wellbeing of the Packers. If #4 is a member of a sound Packers team - great. If he sets all the records in the world with a patched-together team that never really goes anywhere, I'm not at all interested.


Excellent post. This is the only thing I somewhat disagree with. Obviously I don't wan't to watch a patched-together team either, but NOTHING would "disinterest" me in him breaking all of Marino's records. If that's all we had to hang our hat on this year, we'd still be better off than 3/4's of NFL teams out there. Favre overtaking these records, to me, is of much importance. I personally think he is the greatest QB of all time when you consider every aspect of a QB's game, and I want him to retire with those records. Who knows if we'll ever have another QB even close to his greatness again. So, for the sake of Favre, even if we suck, I will be drunkingly cheering my ass off every time another one of Marino's records go down, at the same time wishing bad things to happen to Peyton Manning! :oops: Go Favre, you are a living legend.