Time to Extend TT's contract

[Tarlam!]

I saw recently, where a journalist suggested TT needs to extend M3's deal soon to ensure his services at a reasonable rate beyond next season. I tend to agree.

Spinning that further, though, TT's deal is up after next season as well. I want him extended now. The guy has clearly demonstrated he can locate, recruit and integrate bargain rookies and FAs.

Show TT the money, BEFORE the new Prez comes.

[CaliforniaCheez]

Are you trying to spin up the board?? Or maybe some who have called Ted a Turtle??

Frankly it is the job of Bob Harlan's replacement.
In 05 I gave him the benefit of the doubt.
In 06 I hated the firing of the coaching staff and loss of so many players without any benefit in return.
07 I loved the offseason and thought it was great he didn't bring in many free agents. I have liked each of his drafts (though the 05 class has done little)

I think after the 08 season is the time to evaluate the totality of his accomplishments.

[Bretsky]

I saw recently, where a journalist suggested TT needs to extend M3's deal soon to ensure his services at a reasonable rate beyond next season. I tend to agree.

Spinning that further, though, TT's deal is up after next season as well. I want him extended now. The guy has clearly demonstrated he can locate, recruit and integrate bargain rookies and FAs.

Show TT the money, BEFORE the new Prez comes.

I thought MM has a three year deal; if that is the case I'd wait til after the season.

I used to detest TT; now I'm fine with him overall......based on our record. Like Ron Wolf, I'll jump on board completely when we win a Super Bowl. I'm fine extending him when he has one year left on his deal, or at the end of this year.

To do some Patler like nitpicking, I can't think of any bargain free agent TT has brought in or successfully recruited. Pickett deal was fair, Woodsen was fair. Those are clearly his two free agent successes but neither signed below fair market value.

Manuel was a bad deal, but we didn't pay him that much. Klemm bombed out but also didn't cost much.

Then there were a slew of marginal free agents we brought in for minimal wage or near it that either made it or were eventually let go.
Ben Taylor.....Frank Walker....Matt O'Dwyer..etc.

It's tough to convince the bargain veterans to come to Green Bay to be honest. There aren't many guys wanting to take below fair market value, and when they do they seem to want to go to good weather or New England.

[vince]

Atari Bigby for starters

[RashanGary]

Atari Bigby?

EDIT: haha, great minds ;)

[Bretsky]

Atari Bigby for starters

I was looking at unrestricted free agents as opposed to guys he signed to the practice squad and developed

[vince]

UFA's don't sign for "bargains." That's why they go that route. Either that or they aren't valued by their own team and are essentially let go.

Here are some bargains TT has signed...

Aaron Kampman, Donald Driver, Al Harris, Nick Barnett and Cullen Jenkins

[RashanGary]

I was looking at unrestricted free agents as opposed to guys he signed to the practice squad and developed

Haha, nitpicker :)

There is more than one way to skin a cat ;)


There are very few successfull low wage UFA's. The UFA just isn't all it's cracked up to be.

[RashanGary]

UFA's don't sign for "bargains." That's why they go that route. Either that or they aren't valued by their own team and are essentially let go.



I agree. I have some research that I am putting in to develop a somewhat detailed, fact oriented look at building a team. I have a hypothesis that UFA should be a very small part of the whole, but we'll see where everything goes.

Ultimately, I think the areas I'm researching are very applicable to the discussions we have here and will finially put into words the concepts that I think make Ted Thompson successfull and made Mike Sherman a failure.

I'm guessing it will take me a month or two. If I was paid to do this for a living, I could probably pound it out in a week or two. Unfortunately, I have to do it in my spare time.

[rpiotr01]

Before TT is extended we have to see how he approaches this offseason. If the Packers finish the season strong and make the playoffs, that's a good sign that the team is ready to make a big SB push, and that's the time to make a big push for one or two big FAs. Think Turner. If he continues to plod after THIS season then something is wrong, then there's something he just doesn't get and then maybe it's time for him to go.

[Bretsky]

UFA's don't sign for "bargains." That's why they go that route. Either that or they aren't valued by their own team and are essentially let go.

Here are some bargains TT has signed...

Aaron Kampman, Donald Driver, Al Harris, Nick Barnett and Cullen Jenkins


UFA do sign for bargains; Ron Wolf secured a few in his days. A Thomas to the Patriots is an easy example as well.

[Bretsky]

I was looking at unrestricted free agents as opposed to guys he signed to the practice squad and developed

Haha, nitpicker :)

There is more than one way to skin a cat ;)


There are very few successfull low wage UFA's. The UFA just isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Yes, you are right

[vince]

Good luck with that JH.

As far as Tarlam's original proposal, I agree, re-sign TT, although I don't think he'll be in joepardy with the new Pres. This team has gone from disaster to one of, if not the best, positions in the league in the short time Thompson has had to reroute this ship. Anyone worthy of the Presidency is smart enough to understand that.

[RashanGary]

I have a formula that I developed for roster value that is somewhat like a Newton*Meter. It's (player grade * positional value) = Roster Value. If you're thinking torque, it's force * moment, the grade being the force, the position value being the leverage. All of this info is going to be taken from respected writers (if they'll answer my questions) and a couple football posters here that I respect adn I think everyone else does too. From these numbers, I'm going to take good teams and bad teams and find a span of value that they fall under. There has never been a team of all Taco Wallaces and there will never be a team of all Payton Manning, Reggie White and Ladanian Tomlinsons. There is a limit that is approaced on each side. My goal is to come close to those limits.

From there, I'll have a Best (Let's call it 75 out of 100) and a worste (lets call it 25 out of 100). There are 50 value points (like the newton meter) between best and worste. From there, you can start anylizing how adding one player in place of another will effect the total outcome. From there, you can figure out the percentage of improvement. EXAMPLE

(change in value) / 50 (difference between worste and best) = % gain]

Then you take %gain and compare it to % of recources used and we can start discussing whether it was a good or bad decision. We'll then compare a bunch of UFA's, Draft, Fringe markets, ect. . . and get some conclusions in short term benefit and big picture benefit.



This is really basic and obviously slopped together, but this is my aim. I'm going to run it by Patler and few other people before I finish it, but I think it's going to be a somewhat meaningfull work. The scales are invented by me, using valued opinions, so they are not perfect but I think if I asked a bunch of people who understand math/physics as well as football, that they'd agree it has merit and use. We'll see though. It's just getting started. It will probably be an end of the season thing.

[ND72]

Before TT is extended we have to see how he approaches this offseason. If the Packers finish the season strong and make the playoffs, that's a good sign that the team is ready to make a big SB push, and that's the time to make a big push for one or two big FAs. Think Turner. If he continues to plod after THIS season then something is wrong, then there's something he just doesn't get and then maybe it's time for him to go.


Here's my thing about the super bowl push. By the time this team is truly ready for a Super Bowl push...which, by looking at the NFC, could be this year for all we know. But, for a true push, #4 will probably be gone, and we'll be starting a 1st time NFL starter. Now I think Aaron Rodgers can do it on this team, because Ted Thompson has built a team that favors Aaron Rodgers, all he's truly missing is a good running back. Tough defense, protect the football, etc.etc. is exactly what Aaron Rodgers needs to be a good starter in the league. But he needs a running game big time, even more than Brett Favre does.

I'm all about extending Ted Thompson. I think he took a team that was heading towards financial hardship (aka, San Fran) and put us in positions to go after some guys if/when we need to, and just like his mentor, makes some contraversial high draft picks (Greg Jennings, James Jones) and proves they are worthy. Yes, Justin Harrell is still a huge question, and not taking the Browns trade will forever anger me.....but even Ron Wolf made mistakes.

As far as McCarthy extension....I'm still on the boarder. I think he is a great week manager. He has solid practices, and holds high expectations. I think he has a good offensive mind, but I think he outthinks himself, which more experience could improve. But I still have issues with him, but am still looking forward to what he can do with this team.

[vince]

Linebacker A - age 30 - signed by Team A for $7 million/yr. - on pace for 77 tackles and 1.5 sacks this year.

Linebacker B - age 26 - signed by Team B for $5.8 million/yr. - on pace for 149 tackles and 4 sacks this year.

Multiple Choice Question: Which team signed the better bargain? A or B?
Rhetorical question, I know, but those are the very simple facts.



Adalius Thomas signed a 5-year, $35 million ($20 million guaranteed) contract (Average $7 million/yr.) and is on pace to have 77 tackles and 1.5 sacks this year.

Nick Barnett signed a 6-year, $34.85 million (can't find guaranteed number) contract (average $5.8 million/yr.) and is on pace to have 149 tackles and 4 sacks.

I'd say first, that Thomas was NOT a bargain, and second that Thompson signed the bargain linebacker.

[vince]

If Koren Robinson proves to be any kind of contributor as a kick returner and/or receiver, he also could very well be a big bargain signing.

[RashanGary]

The age thing can't be underestimated either. Barnett should be good for the duration of his contract. Thomas stands a good chance of declining over the course of his deal and becoming injured.


Thomas is an example of one of the better UFA signings and Barnett is just the normal "get mine early" deal.

[RashanGary]

Will Witherspoon was signed a year earlier. He's antoher good comparison



He's on track for 109 tackles, 2.5 sacks, 2.5 FF and 0 INT's. HE signed at 5.5 mil per year (a year earlier than Barnett before the big jump in pay days)


Barnett is on pace to get 149 tackles, 4 sacks and 5 INT's with a contract of 5.8 mil


Witherspoon is performing below Barnett and had he signed the same year as Barnett, he would have gotten a 10% CBA jump, bringing his salary to over 6 mil per year. Relatively speaking, Witherspoon costed more at the time and performed less. Another example of the drafting well and signing your own paying off.

Something more comprehensive has to be put together though. People will always find the exception and confuse it with the rule until many of these comparisions are done.

[GBRulz]

I thought TT had a 5 year contract? We're not even halfway through it, so IMO it's a bit early to extend him.

What I would really like to see is how we finish the season, including the playoffs. If we are one impact player short to move this team to the next level, I want to see him agressively go after someone to fill that need, someone who can make an impact NOW, not 3 years from now.

[Carolina_Packer]

I have a formula that I developed for roster value that is somewhat like a Newton*Meter. It's (player grade * positional value) = Roster Value. If you're thinking torque, it's force * moment, the grade being the force, the position value being the leverage. All of this info is going to be taken from respected writers (if they'll answer my questions) and a couple football posters here that I respect adn I think everyone else does too. From these numbers, I'm going to take good teams and bad teams and find a span of value that they fall under. There has never been a team of all Taco Wallaces and there will never be a team of all Payton Manning, Reggie White and Ladanian Tomlinsons. There is a limit that is approaced on each side. My goal is to come close to those limits.

From there, I'll have a Best (Let's call it 75 out of 100) and a worste (lets call it 25 out of 100). There are 50 value points (like the newton meter) between best and worste. From there, you can start anylizing how adding one player in place of another will effect the total outcome. From there, you can figure out the percentage of improvement. EXAMPLE

(change in value) / 50 (difference between worste and best) = % gain]

Then you take %gain and compare it to % of recources used and we can start discussing whether it was a good or bad decision. We'll then compare a bunch of UFA's, Draft, Fringe markets, ect. . . and get some conclusions in short term benefit and big picture benefit.



This is really basic and obviously slopped together, but this is my aim. I'm going to run it by Patler and few other people before I finish it, but I think it's going to be a somewhat meaningfull work. The scales are invented by me, using valued opinions, so they are not perfect but I think if I asked a bunch of people who understand math/physics as well as football, that they'd agree it has merit and use. We'll see though. It's just getting started. It will probably be an end of the season thing.

Will salary cap be a factor in determining roster value? Obviously a salary cap forces a club to decide on a core group of guys who will make the biggest piece of the pie collectively, and the rest of the roster will divide up the remaining money spent towards the cap. It sounds like an interesting study. Here are some additional resources you may wish to tap for ideas.

feedback@pro-football-reference.com They might have some ideas

Dr. David Romer and economics professor at Cal Berkeley wrote an interesting article related to the NFL, kind of a statistical analysis about going for it on fourth down early in the game and how it affects outcomes:

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2002/08/19_ftball.html

To possibly pick Dr. Romer's brain about your idea of roster value, here is his UC Berkeley web page:

http://emlab.berkeley.edu/econ/faculty/romer_d.shtml

It would be way cool if you bounced your ideas off of him and he responded.

There's always Elias too:

Elias Sports Bureau Inc
500 5th Avenue, New York, NY 10110
phone: (212) 869-1530

Here is a web site after your heart, JH. They might provide you with another place from which to bounce ideas:

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=934

contact@coldhardfootballfacts.com (they encourage new ideas for stats, articles on their site)

Good Luck! Sounds interesting. If you ever need research assistance of any kind, PM me.

The upload site for Packerrats nation that is detailed in one of the sticky notes at the top of the first forum page explains how to share files to the site. Basically you can just email an attachment to packerrat@onlinefilefolder.com and view the contents of the folder at:

http://www.onlinefilefolder.com/index.php?action=getshare&type=1&user_num=57737&share_id=3286&hash=770e304857ac6221c308f0b5f992f1d2




Current URL [close]

Change URL to

[woodbuck27]

UFA's don't sign for "bargains." That's why they go that route. Either that or they aren't valued by their own team and are essentially let go.

Here are some bargains TT has signed...

Aaron Kampman, Donald Driver, Al Harris, Nick Barnett and Cullen Jenkins

TT came within a whisker of losing Kampman to the Vikings. It shoud never have gone that far. TT scared the wits out of me on that late signing and was unnecessary given Aarons work ethic.

Kampman the ultimate in the trenchs Packer. We are so fortunate he remained with us.

Donald Driver, Al Harris, Nick Barnett and Cullen Jenkins were all no brainers fr. a Packer fan standpoint. All very solid in their contributions.

TT blew it on the Randy Moss episode. Asleep at the wheel. . .or was he committed to acquiring this obvious talented WR.

Imagine the difficulty that the opposition Ds would have had trying to cover both DD and Randy Moss.

The offensive punch that would have been afforded us, with those two WRs, and especially in light of our lousy running game and resultant demands to pass is just mindbogling.

We very well could have had Moss for a third (07), and may argue will pay of long term by drafting WR James Jones with that pick.

I disagree that TT had a sound off season. The fact we are 5-1 is due to an overall reduction of strength in the lower tiers of teams in the NFL and the fact some teams maybe Philly and certainly San Diego started slow.

I have to rush out or would elaborate.

I would not extend either MM or TT at this time.

MM has another season - on contract and we need more time to decide if he can handle the pressure of the game. I believe that MM works very hard and is dedicated to be a better HC and to Packer winning.

I want to see some change fr. TT.

GO PACKERS !

[BallHawk]

I disagree that TT had a sound off season. The fact we are 5-1 is due to an overall reduction of strength in the lower tiers of teams in the NFL and the fact some teams maybe Philly and certainly San Diego started slow.

You can phrase it any way you want Woody, but we're 5-1 and almost a sure lock to make the playoffs. That means the GM is doing something right.

[Tarlam!]

I have to rush out or would elaborate.



:shock:

[vince]

TT came within a whisker of losing Kampman to the Vikings. It shoud never have gone that far. TT scared the wits out of me on that late signing and was unnecessary given Aarons work ethic.

Kampman the ultimate in the trenchs Packer. We are so fortunate he remained with us.Kudos to TT for signing Aaron Kampman! My God, Woody. I am amazed by your insistence on criticizing a man for doing what you approve of! None of us know how specific negotiations go. The deal got done. Aaron Kampman is another big bargain signing by Ted Thompson, and you feel the need to criticize him for it?

And Woody, don't make excuses for wins. With the possible exception of the Vikings, the teams that the Packers beat are all very solid teams in this league.

[The Shadow]

I would make extending Thompson's contract a top priority for the Green Bay Packers.

[Scott Campbell]

I would make extending Thompson's contract a top priority for the Green Bay Packers.


I like what I'm seeing, but I agree with Michele. He's got plenty of time on his existing deal. Extend him prior to the end of next season if the team continues to improve.

MM is a different story. He can't head into next year with just 1 year left on his deal. That would make him a lame duck. I might start negotiation now, but probably wouldn't ink the deal until we clinched a playoff spot.

At 5-1, I like our chances. But if this team does the unexpected and takes a nose dive, I really don't want either guy wrapped up with a longer commitment.

[Scott Campbell]

TT came within a whisker of losing Kampman to the Vikings. It shoud never have gone that far. TT scared the wits out of me on that late signing and was unnecessary given Aarons work ethic.

Kampman the ultimate in the trenchs Packer.


Well I'm sorry Ted scared you. I'm sure it wasn't intentional. But now it's time to change your undies and move on.

You don't get docked points for "almost" losing a guy any more than you get credit for "almost" signing Moss. But you seem willing to argue both sides of any point as long as it involves vilifying Ted. Hatred is not good for your soul Woody.

Finally, Kampman is very good, but Reggie was the ultimate.

[RashanGary]

No need to extend TT right now. I'd wait till his last season and if things are continuing upward they way they have since 4-12, I'd pay him like a top 5 GM.

[retailguy]

No need to extend TT right now. I'd wait till his last season and if things are continuing upward they way they have since 4-12, I'd pay him like a top 5 GM.


I disagree. after 6 games of very strange football, and 2 previous seasons of 12-20 football, the time to extend him is NOW while his value is lower - just like you all laud him for doing with the players. Now is the time for a BARGAIN.

I think the duration should be about 45 years or so, with a "no death" clause in the contract. His ass is NOT sneaking out of here like Lombardi did with a move to Washington, followed by an untimely death....

When you've got a "future star" in the making and it is clear to every learned and not so learned mind, you MUST act. You MUST NOT WAIT, or, like Moss he'll end up in New England with all of the rest of the good players/coaches.

[son of a vic]

No need to extend TT right now. I'd wait till his last season and if things are continuing upward they way they have since 4-12, I'd pay him like a top 5 GM.


I disagree. after 6 games of very strange football, and 2 previous seasons of 12-20 football, the time to extend him is NOW while his value is lower - just like you all laud him for doing with the players. Now is the time for a BARGAIN.

I think the duration should be about 45 years or so, with a "no death" clause in the contract. His ass is NOT sneaking out of here like Lombardi did with a move to Washington, followed by an untimely death....

When you've got a "future star" in the making and it is clear to every learned and not so learned mind, you MUST act. You MUST NOT WAIT, or, like Moss he'll end up in New England with all of the rest of the good


players/coaches.

I truly do not understand your stance on this issue. You hate on Thompson, (while the team is on the upswing), but you were standing on the deck of the SS Sherman, bailing water on a ship that was already sunk thanks to Captain Mike.
Nobody says you have to love the guy, but there is progress being made through the draft, that didn't happen under Sherman. He has made mistakes for sure, But Ted is an upgrade over Sherman as a GM, whether you like it , or agree with it.
I thought Sherman was a fat idiot, you think Ted is a lying prick. The difference is that I didn't bang on Shermy until he got a legit chance (4 years) to prove what a dumb ass he was. You, on the other hand, hated Ted from day one, simply because he replaced your boy.

[Joemailman]

No need to extend TT right now. I'd wait till his last season and if things are continuing upward they way they have since 4-12, I'd pay him like a top 5 GM.


I disagree. after 6 games of very strange football, and 2 previous seasons of 12-20 football, the time to extend him is NOW while his value is lower - just like you all laud him for doing with the players. Now is the time for a BARGAIN.

I think the duration should be about 45 years or so, with a "no death" clause in the contract. His ass is NOT sneaking out of here like Lombardi did with a move to Washington, followed by an untimely death....

When you've got a "future star" in the making and it is clear to every learned and not so learned mind, you MUST act. You MUST NOT WAIT, or, like Moss he'll end up in New England with all of the rest of the good players/coaches.

Oh, I get it. Because you preached doom and gloom about what would happen in the early part of the season, and the Packers are 5-1, that qualifies as 6 games of very strange football. How silly of me to think of it as good football. Really, you and Woody should probably consider starting your own support group. How traumatic this season must be for you.

[cheesner]

Before TT is extended we have to see how he approaches this offseason. If the Packers finish the season strong and make the playoffs, that's a good sign that the team is ready to make a big SB push, and that's the time to make a big push for one or two big FAs. Think Turner. If he continues to plod after THIS season then something is wrong, then there's something he just doesn't get and then maybe it's time for him to go.
Were you one of the poster clamoring for a big name FA Safety this past season? Had we done that, would Bigby have gotten the reps? Would he have developed? Signing a big name FA (all of whom were not as good as Atari has turned out to be) would have made this team worse. Why does Ted HAVE to sign a FA in order to compete for a SB? How do all the players who are FAs come into the league? The draft.

I say sign TT now for about 10 years.

If his original deal was for 5 years, he has had 3 drafts, he only has 2 yrs left.

[superfan]

No need to extend TT right now. I'd wait till his last season and if things are continuing upward they way they have since 4-12, I'd pay him like a top 5 GM.


I disagree. after 6 games of very strange football, and 2 previous seasons of 12-20 football, the time to extend him is NOW while his value is lower - just like you all laud him for doing with the players. Now is the time for a BARGAIN.

I think the duration should be about 45 years or so, with a "no death" clause in the contract. His ass is NOT sneaking out of here like Lombardi did with a move to Washington, followed by an untimely death....

When you've got a "future star" in the making and it is clear to every learned and not so learned mind, you MUST act. You MUST NOT WAIT, or, like Moss he'll end up in New England with all of the rest of the good players/coaches.

It is explicitly stated in the well documented collective bargaining agreement for GMs that the "no death" clause is not allowed. However, there is no specific mention of cryogenics and/or cloning, so perhaps that would be an acceptable compromise.

Should those negotiations fall through, I'm in complete agreement with Scott Campbell's previous take on extending TT's and MM's contracts.

[HarveyWallbangers]

To do some Patler like nitpicking, I can't think of any bargain free agent TT has brought in or successfully recruited. Pickett deal was fair, Woodsen was fair. Those are clearly his two free agent successes but neither signed below fair market value.

Not that it disproves your point, but I think Donald Lee qualifies. I'm hoping Koren Robinson will qualify soon.

[Patler]

TT came within a whisker of losing Kampman to the Vikings. It shoud never have gone that far. TT scared the wits out of me on that late signing and was unnecessary given Aarons work ethic.



Your memory is very foggy, Woodbuck. The Packers never "came within a whisker of losing Kampman to the Vikings."

Kampman was a RESTRICTED free agent, and the Packers made a qualifying offer. That meant they would not lose him unless the compensation they would receive was more valuable in THEIR opinion than his services for the contract offered by another team. They had the right to match. The Vikings were never going to get him, unless the Packers were willing to give him up. The Packers held the cards.

The following year, when Kampman would have been an UNRESTRICTED free agent, they reached a deal before he even became a free agent. The contract was signed before any other team could even court him.

Your opinion of TT apparently is based, at least in part, on erroneous understandings of the facts.

[retailguy]

No need to extend TT right now. I'd wait till his last season and if things are continuing upward they way they have since 4-12, I'd pay him like a top 5 GM.


I disagree. after 6 games of very strange football, and 2 previous seasons of 12-20 football, the time to extend him is NOW while his value is lower - just like you all laud him for doing with the players. Now is the time for a BARGAIN.

I think the duration should be about 45 years or so, with a "no death" clause in the contract. His ass is NOT sneaking out of here like Lombardi did with a move to Washington, followed by an untimely death....

When you've got a "future star" in the making and it is clear to every learned and not so learned mind, you MUST act. You MUST NOT WAIT, or, like Moss he'll end up in New England with all of the rest of the good players/coaches.

It is explicitly stated in the well documented collective bargaining agreement for GMs that the "no death" clause is not allowed. However, there is no specific mention of cryogenics and/or cloning, so perhaps that would be an acceptable compromise.

Should those negotiations fall through, I'm in complete agreement with Scott Campbell's previous take on extending TT's and MM's contracts.

Finally. someone gets it.... Praise God.

[vince]

Oh, everyone gets it RG.

It's just not the slightest bit humorous. In the face of facts that completely overwhelm your well-documented position on just about everything Packers, you respond with absurdity.

The post's undertones of attempting to belittle Thompson supporters, combined with its complete irrelevance to anything even resembling reality make it completely undeserving of a response - that's all. Charitable contribution by superfan.

Exaggerating the position of those who disagree with you to the point of ridiculousness not only not the slightest bit "funny," it's dishonest and completely discrediting of the person who attempts it. Such underhanded attacking of other contributors to the board is unbecoming of a mod.

Stick to the facts RG, assuming you can use them to support your conclusions. Making shit up about your intellectual adversaries here does you no justice.

[son of a vic]

Finally. someone gets it.... Praise God.[/quote]


Do not bring thee almighty into your vendetta against a lyin prick. It's not good politics.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Ted Thompson Q&A: Criticism goes with territory, GM says
By Mike Vandermause

Ted Thompson was hired in January 2005 as Green Bay Packers general manager. Under his direction over the past 33 months, the Packers hired a new coach and overhauled their roster. On the field, the Packers have progressed from 4-12 in 2005 to 8-8 last year to 5-1 this season.

In an interview with Green Bay Press-Gazette sports editor Mike Vandermause on Thursday, Thompson discussed, among other topics, the Packers' fast start, how he handled offseason criticism, his assessment of first-round draft pick Justin Harrell and whether there's hope for the team's struggling run game.

Q: Were you expecting such a fast start? If someone had said you would be 5-1, would that have been a surprise to you?

Thompson: I don't know if in my business you ever think about stuff like that. I said at the start I expected us to win, and that sort of thing. In football, you just try to win every week and add them up at the end. We're happy to be where we are. We haven't played our best football yet. I guess we feel optimistic.

Q: Last year after six games you were 2-4. What's been the biggest difference between last year and this year?

Thompson: The team was able to hang in there and win some games. I know often times the quote is used, 'It's an ugly win.' But that's the way you survive and you win in the NFL. You hang in there, even when you're not playing your best ball, and you figure out a way to win. One week it's kicking a long field goal. Maybe the next week it's picking up a fumble. It's just figuring out a way to get it done. I think the team has a little more confidence in doing that, and certainly I think as a whole our defense has played solid. I think they can play better as well.

Q: When you hired Mike McCarthy, you saw something in him. What do you like best about him and the job he's done so far?

Thompson: I think he's what I thought in terms of being a very tough, honest guy. He relates real well with the players. I think he understands that players are different. It's like Bum Phillips used to say, 'You don't treat all players the same, but you treat them all fairly.' Everybody is a little bit different. I think you have to be as a coach, especially in this day and age, able to know which buttons to push on which players. And his staff as a whole, they don't get all flustered. Injuries are going to happen in this league. They happen to everybody. They seem very comfortable in the work they've done in training other people. Especially I know we get a lot of guff because we've got a lot of young guys. But they're not put off by doing that. They just play the next guy. Mike Holmgren was excellent at that. You can worry about stuff until it kills you, but you've got to play the next game. I think Mike has some good qualities in that area.

Q: Over the long haul, can a team succeed without a productive running game?

Thompson: Sure they can. Indianapolis did it for several years until last year when they had the new running back. We expect to run the ball. We expect to be more productive running the ball. We've played some teams that people quite frankly just don't run very well against them. ... You do what you're doing (well). We have some good receivers. We have a very good quarterback. We have good pass protection. Our running game is still a work in progress. I don't think you can necessarily assume that we're not going to be more successful running the ball. I think it will be a week in and week out kind of thing.

Q: So you think there will be improvement in that area?

Thompson: Oh yeah. We're looking for improvement in the passing game, too.

Q: Besides your opponents, are there any other reasons you've been able to pinpoint why you haven't run the ball more effectively?

Thompson: I think it's a combination of our running game is sort of a multiple dance by multiple dance partners. You have 11 offensive guys and 11 defensive guys, and you want your offensive guys to be in the right spot. Sometimes it's one of the offensive linemen not getting his block. Sometimes it's a back not seeing the hole quickly enough. Sometimes it's this, sometimes it's that. We just haven't got it going the way we want to yet.

Q: Are you satisfied with the performance of the running backs so far?

Thompson: Yeah. I like our running backs. I like the group. I think we're still trying to find what roles for each is the best particular matchup for us. But I like our potential. I don't think we've played to our potential yet.

Q: You've invested several draft picks in your backfield, and you were criticized in the offseason for not picking up a veteran free agent. Do you feel confident about the group you have?

Thompson: I do like the group. It's kind of like what I've said about the defensive line over time. I think the group has to be better than any of the individuals. But I think we're OK with that.

Q: Did you hear a lot of the criticism in the offseason about not doing enough to bolster your offense, and did it bother you?

Thompson: Certainly you hear that. And I've said this before, it's an absolute privilege to work for the Packers, and when you're in a position like I am, because of the passion, because of the interest that we have state- and nation-wide, it's always going to be a focus of attention. You can't sway what you're thinking based on talk shows or whatever. You just can't do that. It doesn't mean everything turns out exactly the way you want either. You do the best you can and you move on to the next thing.

Q: Are you tempted to say 'I told you so' after your fast start?

Thompson: Absolutely not. Because I think your normal fan, for the most part, at least all the ones I talk to in the summer time, they say good luck and we're pulling for you. Packer fans just want the Packers to do (well). They want good quality people and they want players that play hard. I think we have a group that does that. Again, this is a journey. This is way too early to say I told you so even if one was tempted to say I told you so.

Q: Do you ever get nervous because you're carrying only two tight ends and two quarterbacks? Is that like treading on thin ice?

Thompson: It's football. Things are going to happen. You're going to have injuries. You can't protect yourself against everything. That's just the way it worked out this year. It wasn't by design. There's no master plan saying the right way to do this is with two tight ends. It's just the way it kind of worked out. You go with what you've got. It doesn't do any good to be anxious about it or worry about it. It's just the way it is.

Q: What's your assessment of linebacker A.J. Hawk's performance? Is he playing up to the level of a No. 5 overall draft pick?

Thompson: I think A.J.'s a very good player. He was a good player when he got here and he's a better player now. He plays hard all the time. He's incredibly talented, and his day will come in terms of the big plays. Sometimes it just doesn't happen for you. I think him and Nick (Barnett) have played very, very well.

Q: You stocked up on the defensive line. Are you pleased with the way that unit has played?

Thompson: Yes. You will win with defense, especially with a defensive line. As I've said so much that people are probably sick of me saying it, I really like our group. And I like the mentality of our group and the fact they play well together. You can substitute different guys. You can have different rotations and they still play the game. I really do like that group.

Q: You're not getting a lot of immediate impact out of first-round draft pick Justin Harrell? Why did you draft him in the first round, and will that investment pay off down the road?

Thompson: Obviously, especially with a first-round pick, people want immediate results. I think in a perfect world, it would work that way. I'm completely confident that spending a first-round pick on Justin Harrell is going to be viewed long term as a very wise investment. But the proof's in the pudding. But he suited up the last couple weeks and did all right. He's still growing into this.

Q: What do you enjoy most about your job?

Thompson: I enjoy most about my job, No. 1, is seeing a very happy locker room. That really is the best thing about my job. But then, I think it was the San Diego game, it was right near the end of the game, and Bob (Harlan) and I were sitting in our box, and everybody in the stadium was standing up and they were singing one of those goofy songs and they were twirling some sort of white things that the marketing people had given out. And you look, and both of us said almost instantly, 'This is why we do this, for a moment like this.' To see everybody having a good time. The team has played well. They beat a very good team, and that's why you do this.

[RashanGary]

I must admit that I enjoy seeing Thomson succeed. He walked into a horrible situation. I know the menality of putting in early investments with a vision to have them pay off. You know it's hard, but you do it because you have the ultimate goal in mind. I believe that he knew he was making hard decisions. He put the weight of the organization on his shoulders and left no where else but himself to point the finger at if things went wrong. He didn't take any easy bail outs. He did everything the right way, even if it was hard to start.

[run pMc]

Don't know when his contract ends, M3's is next year. I was thinking TT had more time? That being the case, no reason to extend it yet.

As for how he's doing, I'll quote Peter King and let you draw any analogies to decide where this team is probably headed:

The incompetence of the Miami Dolphins front office cannot be overstated. At least the incompetence between 1998 and 2003.

<snip/>

Miami had 59 picks total in those six drafts -- 46 used to draft players, and 13 used to trade for 10 other players (Tyrone Wheatley, Kevin Gogan, Jim Druckenmiller, Alonzo Mayes, Matt Turk, Ricky Williams, Jeff Ogden, Cade McNown, Jay Williams, Sage Rosenfels). They traded two ones and a four for Ricky Williams and a four in return, and traded two sixes for McNown.

Zero for 59! Astonishing.

Want to know why the Patriots are (Matt) Light years ahead of the Dolphins right now? It's the base of home-grown fifth- through 10th-year veterans -- the guys who should be the bedrock of a good team -- that New England has and Miami doesn't. Brady, Light, Richard Seymour, Asante Samuel, Ty Warren, Dan Koppen, Eugene Wilson. Nine Patriots from those six drafts suited up for New England's win at Miami on Sunday. No players from those six drafts suited up for Miami.

"It's a big reason why we are where we are right now,'' Jason Taylor (Miami class of '97) said the other day.

No. It's the big reason
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/10/21/mmqb/2.html

[The Leaper]

No need to extend TT right now.

Thompson doesn't seem the type to jump at money. The lack of limelight in Green Bay probably suits him just fine. I don't think we need to be that afraid of someone else swooping in and snatching him.

As long as Green Bay pays him an acceptable salary, I don't see any reason why he would leave Green Bay right now. He seems to really enjoy building this roster...and seeing the fruits of his work come to fruition has to be meaningful to him.

That said, when the time comes, the Packers need to do what it takes to keep Thompson in town. He's easily one of the top 10 GMs in the league, and near the top in terms of scouting college talent. In another year, this team might show enough to move him up even higher in that regard.

[Merlin]

Remember, whatever you do in this board, don't disagree with the masses. Can anyone tell me what happens when you put a pile of rookies on a roster with many of them starting? Some of them will turn out to be be good players. Thompson is playing the odds by drafting AND keeping a ton of young players. So far there have been some pleasant surprises. You could do the same thing with free agents and have the same results. The Packers are 5-1 for a lot of reasons but attributing it all to Thompson is naive. Yes, we beat some good teams from 2006, but this is 2007. Outside of the Giants, who have we beat? The Eagles? The Chargers? Both of them look to be really inconsistent this year. The Giants even looked inconsistent to start the season, you know when we played them? We barely beat the Vikings, we blew the Bears game and if the our defense didn't finally show up in the second half, we lose to the Redskins. Those were our last three games and we didn't look good at all. The excuses abound as to why, mostly "we're young and will make mistakes" But never a thought about why we are in this position to begin with. For as much credit is you give Thompson, you have to look at the other side of that. With a more experienced offensive line, some depth ANYWHERE, maybe we wouldn't be discussing 5-1 and narrow wins, maybe we would be discussing 6-0 and blow outs. The Patriots obviously have an obnoxious amount of talent. We have?

Yeah, let's extend the gambler who plays the lower odds of quantity over quality.

[cheesner]

Remember, whatever you do in this board, don't disagree with the masses. Can anyone tell me what happens when you put a pile of rookies on a roster with many of them starting? Some of them will turn out to be be good players. Thompson is playing the odds by drafting AND keeping a ton of young players. So far there have been some pleasant surprises.
That BASTARD! I knew he was up to something. Filling our roster with a lot of young talent! Stop TT! Stop the madness!

You could do the same thing with free agents and have the same results. The Packers are 5-1 for a lot of reasons but attributing it all to Thompson is naive. Yes, we beat some good teams from 2006, but this is 2007. Outside of the Giants, who have we beat? The Eagles? The Chargers? Both of them look to be really inconsistent this year. The Giants even looked inconsistent to start the season, you know when we played them? We barely beat the Vikings, we blew the Bears game and if the our defense didn't finally show up in the second half, we lose to the Redskins. Those were our last three games and we didn't look good at all. The excuses abound as to why, mostly "we're young and will make mistakes" But never a thought about why we are in this position to begin with. For as much credit is you give Thompson, you have to look at the other side of that. With a more experienced offensive line, some depth ANYWHERE, maybe we wouldn't be discussing 5-1 and narrow wins, maybe we would be discussing 6-0 and blow outs. The Patriots obviously have an obnoxious amount of talent. We have?

Yeah, let's extend the gambler who plays the lower odds of quantity over quality.
No. Lets extend the GM with the astute judgement of talent.

How many teams are 6-0 over even the last 5 years that won by blowouts? Maybe 3 teams in that time frame (SD, Indy, and NE). There are not a lot of dominating teams out there because it is very difficult to do. Signing FAs uses up cap space. You use up your cap space you can't keep your developing players. You don't keep your rising stars and you mire yourself in mediocrity.

SD, Indy, and NE, all built slowly through the draft. They developed their talent in-house to become a deep and talented team. I am not saying your plan to improve the Packers won't work, if it did, though, it would be the first time.

[The Shadow]

Remember, whatever you do in this board, don't disagree with the masses. Can anyone tell me what happens when you put a pile of rookies on a roster with many of them starting? Some of them will turn out to be be good players. Thompson is playing the odds by drafting AND keeping a ton of young players. So far there have been some pleasant surprises. You could do the same thing with free agents and have the same results. The Packers are 5-1 for a lot of reasons but attributing it all to Thompson is naive. Yes, we beat some good teams from 2006, but this is 2007. Outside of the Giants, who have we beat? The Eagles? The Chargers? Both of them look to be really inconsistent this year. The Giants even looked inconsistent to start the season, you know when we played them? We barely beat the Vikings, we blew the Bears game and if the our defense didn't finally show up in the second half, we lose to the Redskins. Those were our last three games and we didn't look good at all. The excuses abound as to why, mostly "we're young and will make mistakes" But never a thought about why we are in this position to begin with. For as much credit is you give Thompson, you have to look at the other side of that. With a more experienced offensive line, some depth ANYWHERE, maybe we wouldn't be discussing 5-1 and narrow wins, maybe we would be discussing 6-0 and blow outs. The Patriots obviously have an obnoxious amount of talent. We have?

Yeah, let's extend the gambler who plays the lower odds of quantity over quality.

To quote the immortal Charlie Brown : "GOOD GRIEF!"
It's painfully obvious that you will only be truly happy if the Green Bay Packers fall on their faces - so your comical blind hatred of Ted Thompson can be sated.
Why not go off and root for the Dolphins if the same tired, buffoonish rants are all you have to offer?


Give me a T!
Give me a T!
Give me a T!

What's that spell?

Disaster...

I'll take an entire season of your 'disasters' - looks like Thompson may well be 'disastering' the team into championship-caliber.

[Partial]

Merlin, sometimes I wonder how you make it through the day.

The gambler??!? Seriously?

[Patler]

You can only beat the teams you are scheduled to play when you are scheduled to play them. It is not the Packers fault nor TT's that their opponents have not been the same calibre as the Patriots.

They have won 9 of their last 10 regular season games. You can argue the teams were bad, had no reason to play hard, were crippled by injuries, whatever. It doesn't matter. You can argue the Packers were lucky, deserved to lose, didn't deserve to win, whatever. None of that matters either. The important thing is that 9 times out of 10 the Packers found ways to win the games. Credit for that goes to the coaching staff and to the players for their performances. Credit for bringing in the head coach and the players who accomplished it goes to the GM.

[BallHawk]

Pater beat me to it. Well said.

Good teams beat the teams they're supposed to beat. Green Bay is doing that right now.

[Carolina_Packer]

http://crystal.typepad.com/crystalclear/images/eeyore.jpg

Merlin+Eeyore=Meeyore :)

[Merlin]

It's nice to know the usual tools are out to protect everyone. Someday you will pull your head out of your collective asses and actually use your gray matter. I won't be holding my breath for that. As I stated, whatever you do, don't disagree with anyone in here. You remind of those fools in high school all sticking together come hell or high water. Even when they were too stupid to face reality. When faced with logic and reality all you can do is mock and name call. WOW, is that all you have? Any facts to back up your argument? Nope, not a one. not one rational argument, just childlike rhetoric.

It sucks when you throw rocks in a glass house but you nutballs are in an iron one and I think they are coming back and hitting you in the melon. You know, that lil world you live in called fantasy land? Face it, you walking zombies wouldn't know the difference between a football and a soccer ball. "All hail the great Ted Thompson" Team does well he is a god, team doesn't do well it's on someone else. And you idiots are calling me names?

[Zool]

http://www.tshirthell.com/shirts/products/a812/a812_bm.gif

[swede]

Remember, whatever you do in this board, don't disagree with the masses. Can anyone tell me what happens when you put a pile of rookies on a roster with many of them starting? Some of them will turn out to be be good players. Thompson is playing the odds by drafting AND keeping a ton of young players. So far there have been some pleasant surprises. You could do the same thing with free agents and have the same results. The Packers are 5-1 for a lot of reasons but attributing it all to Thompson is naive. Yes, we beat some good teams from 2006, but this is 2007. Outside of the Giants, who have we beat? The Eagles? The Chargers? Both of them look to be really inconsistent this year. The Giants even looked inconsistent to start the season, you know when we played them? We barely beat the Vikings, we blew the Bears game and if the our defense didn't finally show up in the second half, we lose to the Redskins. Those were our last three games and we didn't look good at all. The excuses abound as to why, mostly "we're young and will make mistakes" But never a thought about why we are in this position to begin with. For as much credit is you give Thompson, you have to look at the other side of that. With a more experienced offensive line, some depth ANYWHERE, maybe we wouldn't be discussing 5-1 and narrow wins, maybe we would be discussing 6-0 and blow outs. The Patriots obviously have an obnoxious amount of talent. We have?

Yeah, let's extend the gambler who plays the lower odds of quantity over quality.

Merlin, there once was a set of twins whose parents were concerned that the two were so different; one was too much of an optimist and the other too much of a pessimist.

They took the boys to a therapist who place the pessimist in a room filled with toys and candy. He put the optimist in a room filled only with manure.

After twenty minutes they returned to find the pessismist sitting still in the middle of the room, all the delightful things untouched. The boy sadly explained that had he played with the toys something might have broken and gotten him into trouble. He went on to say that the candy was only likely to cause cavities or make him sick.

When they checked on the optimist they found him wildly digging through the manure with a look of pure joy on his face. The lad looked up at his folks and the therapist and said, "With all this horse shit I'm pretty sure there's a pony in here somewhere!"

Merlin, we don't hate you, we're just puzzled why you won't play with the toys.

And as for me, I keep coming back in here because I'm pretty sure there's a pony in here.

[The Leaper]

You could do the same thing with free agents and have the same results.

Not really...if you need convincing, please look at the Sherman era. In all the years Sherman was here, where were his impact FA signings that turned out to be a big help on the level of Jennings, Jones, Hawk, Jolly, etc.?


The Packers are 5-1 for a lot of reasons but attributing it all to Thompson is naive.

I don't think anyone is attributing it all to Thompson...however, he's the guy in charge of who the head coach is and who is on the roster. To claim that Thompson shouldn't receive the lion's share of credit is equally naive.


Outside of the Giants, who have we beat? The Chargers?

Check your Vegas odds, Einstein. The Chargers are the odds on favorite to win the AFC West and be a factor in the playoffs.

Your arguments are making less sense than ever. I'm not sure how that is possible, but I can't argue with the truth.

[MadtownPacker]

And as for me, I keep coming back in here because I'm pretty sure there's a pony in here.Really? As deep as the shit is getting in here I would probably be looking for a clydesdale. :lol:

[Carolina_Packer]

It's nice to know the usual tools are out to protect everyone. Someday you will pull your head out of your collective asses and actually use your gray matter. I won't be holding my breath for that. As I stated, whatever you do, don't disagree with anyone in here. You remind of those fools in high school all sticking together come hell or high water. Even when they were too stupid to face reality. When faced with logic and reality all you can do is mock and name call. WOW, is that all you have? Any facts to back up your argument? Nope, not a one. not one rational argument, just childlike rhetoric.

It sucks when you throw rocks in a glass house but you nutballs are in an iron one and I think they are coming back and hitting you in the melon. You know, that lil world you live in called fantasy land? Face it, you walking zombies wouldn't know the difference between a football and a soccer ball. "All hail the great Ted Thompson" Team does well he is a god, team doesn't do well it's on someone else. And you idiots are calling me names?

Merlin, this is a classic case of "it's not what you say, it's how you say it." Attitude matters. People are just kidding you so that you will lighten up, and not be so overly sensitive. Your opinion matters too, but so does everyone else's. If you don't take yourself or your opinion, or even your reaction to someone else's opinion too seriously, so much the better.

[Brohm]

5 - 1

[Merlin]

You could do the same thing with free agents and have the same results.

Not really...if you need convincing, please look at the Sherman era. In all the years Sherman was here, where were his impact FA signings that turned out to be a big help on the level of Jennings, Jones, Hawk, Jolly, etc.?


The Packers are 5-1 for a lot of reasons but attributing it all to Thompson is naive.

I don't think anyone is attributing it all to Thompson...however, he's the guy in charge of who the head coach is and who is on the roster. To claim that Thompson shouldn't receive the lion's share of credit is equally naive.


Outside of the Giants, who have we beat? The Chargers?

Check your Vegas odds, Einstein. The Chargers are the odds on favorite to win the AFC West and be a factor in the playoffs.

Your arguments are making less sense than ever. I'm not sure how that is possible, but I can't argue with the truth.

I think using Vegas over Einstein pretty much sums up anything you say. Instead of using your brain, you look to the odds of Vegas to determine your opinions. Try watching the games skippy, you might see that your perception isn't reality.

[Merlin]

It's nice to know the usual tools are out to protect everyone. Someday you will pull your head out of your collective asses and actually use your gray matter. I won't be holding my breath for that. As I stated, whatever you do, don't disagree with anyone in here. You remind of those fools in high school all sticking together come hell or high water. Even when they were too stupid to face reality. When faced with logic and reality all you can do is mock and name call. WOW, is that all you have? Any facts to back up your argument? Nope, not a one. not one rational argument, just childlike rhetoric.

It sucks when you throw rocks in a glass house but you nutballs are in an iron one and I think they are coming back and hitting you in the melon. You know, that lil world you live in called fantasy land? Face it, you walking zombies wouldn't know the difference between a football and a soccer ball. "All hail the great Ted Thompson" Team does well he is a god, team doesn't do well it's on someone else. And you idiots are calling me names?

Merlin, this is a classic case of "it's not what you say, it's how you say it." Attitude matters. People are just kidding you so that you will lighten up, and not be so overly sensitive. Your opinion matters too, but so does everyone else's. If you don't take yourself or your opinion, or even your reaction to someone else's opinion too seriously, so much the better.

That only applies when speaking directly to someone. I could put smiley faces all over anything I say and people will still take it, twist it and be stupid about it. It's all really amusing actually, knowing how people will take things no matter how you type them. People if nothing else are predictable. Don't ever disagree with them or they might have to go get a dick implant. Show me a case in here where that isn't the case? As far as taking things too seriously, meh, not me. I can take this shit or leave it. It's the ones who hand it out but can't take it that should probably go sign up for counseling.

[MJZiggy]

I watch the games. Funny, we keep winning 'em.

[Merlin]

Must be because Poppinga is the underworld name for Thompson. Meaning ol' 3T is strapping on the leather and playing the game. He get's credit where it is due but for whatever reason no one in here will say a bad word about him when things don't look so rosey. Talk about unconditional butt love. Geesh.

[MJZiggy]

DID YOU MISS THE WHOLE OFFSEASON AROUND HERE????????

[Scott Campbell]

I think Merlin has some denial issues. I suppose the Pack could start losing and make him happy again.

[Joemailman]

Must be because Poppinga is the underworld name for Thompson. Meaning ol' 3T is strapping on the leather and playing the game. He get's credit where it is due but for whatever reason no one in here will say a bad word about him when things don't look so rosey. Talk about unconditional butt love. Geesh.

Well Merlin, to most of us, 5-1 looks pretty rosey. There was all kinds of criticism of Thompson in the off-season. But the Packers are 5-1. If they were 1-5, it would be a different story. Most of us don't have an agenda in terms of praising Thompson or in bashing him. We judge Thompson based on how we see the team progressing.

[woodbuck27]

TT came within a whisker of losing Kampman to the Vikings. It shoud never have gone that far. TT scared the wits out of me on that late signing and was unnecessary given Aarons work ethic.

Kampman the ultimate in the trenchs Packer. We are so fortunate he remained with us.Kudos to TT for signing Aaron Kampman! My God, Woody. I am amazed by your insistence on criticizing a man for doing what you approve of! None of us know how specific negotiations go. The deal got done. Aaron Kampman is another big bargain signing by Ted Thompson, and you feel the need to criticize him for it?

And Woody, don't make excuses for wins. With the possible exception of the Vikings, the teams that the Packers beat are all very solid teams in this league.

I am merely expecting more from TT.

I am in my personality not a hard man but the way TT goes about his business simply gets under my skin.

He cannot seem to accept a gift when it is offered and his laid off laissey faire attitude drives me to distraction.

It really bugs me that Randy Moss is in NE and not lineing up opposite DD.

It really bothers me that our running game is the worst in the NFL.

The WORST RUNNING GAME and GREEN BAY PACKERS does not compute.

That situation with our running game must bring criticism down on TT not praise.

YES so many here adore him; and please, allow me to expect a lot more fr. him. He is not all to me and a long way from that. I expect a lot more from a GM of my team.

Without the game that Favre has given us to date we would be a sinking ship.

What has TT done to support Favre . . .really Packerrats . . WHAT. . .

Dick ALL !!!

If you disagree YOU are in denial.

Packerrats.

[woodbuck27]

I thought TT had a 5 year contract? We're not even halfway through it, so IMO it's a bit early to extend him.

What I would really like to see is how we finish the season, including the playoffs. If we are one impact player short to move this team to the next level, I want to see him agressively go after someone to fill that need, someone who can make an impact NOW, not 3 years from now.

YES !!!!!

[The Leaper]

What has TT done to support Favre . . .really Packerrats . . WHAT. . .

Well, he drafted Wynn/Jackson, Jennings, Jones, Colledge, Spitz/Coston and Hall...brought in Lee and Morency...so more than half of the starters on offense are Thompson's guys.

Thompson also helped craft a dominant defense that can win games (like against Washington) when Favre clearly isn't at his best. How is that not a help to Favre?

He also gave Favre a head coach that allows him freedom to make adjustments at the LOS...which is a big reason Favre is playing the way he is.

The running game needs to be addressed. There was little Thompson could do about it though...except overpay in a trade. AP and Lynch were off the draft board, and there was little depth at RB this year in the draft. Few FAs were worth anything. I still haven't seen anyone offer a good explanation for how Thompson could have procured a great RB at a fair price. With the team's success this year, attracting FAs should be easier this offseason...and the draft is loaded at RB next year.

[The Shadow]

"........I am in my personality not a hard man but the way TT goes about his business simply gets under my skin.".................................................. ...........................................

Paging Dr. Freud.......

[cheesner]

Must be because Poppinga is the underworld name for Thompson. Meaning ol' 3T is strapping on the leather and playing the game. He get's credit where it is due but for whatever reason no one in here will say a bad word about him when things don't look so rosey. Talk about unconditional butt love. Geesh.
When have things not looked rosey?

That is the problem. Since he has been here, TT has brought in excellent young talent. And I am personally excited about it. As far as 'no one in here will say a bad word' use the search feature for key words 'TT', 'Asshole', and 'destroying the packers' and you will get 162,000 hits. Although there were some rough games last year, and some problem areas currently, the overall picture is very promising for the Packers.

[Partial]

I've never heard one person with as much to complain about when we're 5-1. Hell we could be 6-0 but since we aren't winning by 50 points a week Merlin would be hootin' and hollarin'

The teams we've played are on pace for a collective 9 win season. Very few teams in the NFL win 9 games. We've played a tough schedule so far. Saying anything else makes you look dumb.

We haven't started out this good in 10+ years Merlin. Sherman never did, so don't give me that garbage of TT finally built us back up to where we were during the Sherman days. Maybe talent-wise we're close, but team-wise (coaching, team unity, chemistry, etc) has taken our success to a level that Sherman has never reached this soon.

It's too early to say that we're going to be great and go far in the playoffs, but so far we are winning 83.3% of our games against teams that are winning 57.3%. That is pretty impressive.

[retailguy]

I've never heard one person with as much to complain about when we're 5-1. Hell we could be 6-0 but since we aren't winning by 50 points a week Merlin would be hootin' and hollarin'

The teams we've played are on pace for a collective 9 win season. Very few teams in the NFL win 9 games. We've played a tough schedule so far. Saying anything else makes you look dumb.

We haven't started out this good in 10+ years Merlin. Sherman never did, so don't give me that garbage of TT finally built us back up to where we were during the Sherman days. Maybe talent-wise we're close, but team-wise (coaching, team unity, chemistry, etc) has taken our success to a level that Sherman has never reached this soon.

It's too early to say that we're going to be great and go far in the playoffs, but so far we are winning 83.3% of our games against teams that are winning 57.3%. That is pretty impressive.

Well, not to totally contridict your point, that's not my goal, b/c I agree with a lot of it, but.... Sherman's 2002 squad started out 8-1 before being decimated by injuries and finished 12-4, backing into the playoffs which we ultimately lost to Atlanta.

Just to set you straight on one fact that you missed... I think/agree with you that Ted gets a pass on the run game right now. If they quit winning, and that's why fine, but until then... you just have to keep your mouth shut. :P

[MJZiggy]

Just to set you straight on one fact that you missed... I think/agree with you that Ted gets a pass on the run game right now. If they quit winning, and that's why fine, but until then... you just have to keep your mouth shut. :P
:shock:

[Partial]

OMG! Who are you and WHAT did you do with RG?!? That's fair about starting 8-1. I didn't know they started that well. It will be interesting to see how well they run the ball against Denver. That could be very telling towards what we can expect the rest of the season.

[retailguy]

OMG! Who are you and WHAT did you do with RG?!? That's fair about starting 8-1. I didn't know they started that well. It will be interesting to see how well they run the ball against Denver. That could be very telling towards what we can expect the rest of the season.


Let's be clear. I don't like the guy, and probably never will, BUT, you don't bitch when the guy is 5-1... You see the flaws and you talk about them, but you need to wait until they happen before you bitch about them.... Really.

I don't know whether or not it happens, and today, I don't care. We're 5-1. I don't understand it, and don't think it'll continue, but today, we're 5-1, and until that changes, I'll wait and see. If it continues, I'll give credit where credit is due, and if it doesn't, then I'll see how he intends to fix it.

In the end, I'll probably NEVER like him, but I might respect him more than I do today...

[Merlin]

This is getting so old it's ridiculous. I am going to just agree to disagree. Fortunately for you, I won't say "I told you so". I will however point out your hypocritical stance with Thompson when you say one bad word about him. Because we all know, he has all of the authority and only responsibility for the positive.

[Partial]

TT failed to give us a solid running game to this point. We're still winning. There, I said it.

[Carolina_Packer]

I am happy with 5-1 like everyone else, and I am not satisfied with the run game, like everyone else. We all hope it improves, and are hoping we have the personnel to do it this season.

If we don't, then changes will be made, I'm sure. If it costs us down the road in terms of having success or winning ballgames, I'm sure fans will be upset. GM's try and plan for a lot. A-Rod is the planned successor to Favre. I'm not sure TT had a really solid succession plan at RB. As someone else pointed out in a previous thread where I commented on this, TT thought that AG was going to resign with us and got caught flat-footed when Houston gave him stupid money. The free agency market wasn't a great option either. We had Morency from last year's trade, Jackson, Wynn and Grant through this year's draft and an end of training camp trade. We had Arliss Beach and PJ Pope as raw prospects. Noah Herron was a good utility guy. The sum of the parts was either too injured or too little experience. What was needed IMO was better planning. We drafted running backs this year as a reaction to a need. We also drafted a DT in the first round this year as the best player available, not necessarily for immediate need. It seems like TT did not plan as well for the succession of Ahman Green as he could have. I wish he had read the tea leaves back when he first started to realize that AG had an expiring contract and had some miles on the tires. Should have brought in his successor back then to compete with him. Not a specialty, 3rd down type back, but a legit, tote the rock 20-25 times a game type back. I don't have names to suggest. I'm just suggesting that it did not sneak up on him, he just left too much to chance by not drafting running backs in his first two drafts, but settling for diamonds in the rough, or relatively unproven, undeveloped talent to be our running game. Yes, the injuries are a tough reality, and the inexperience is not the player's fault. They are who they are and where they are right now in their careers. TT needed to take a little more care in planning our group of RB's instead of having so many young, untested guys. Too bad we are not sitting on a RB who was drafted in the same draft as A-Rod who is now a big time contributor, now that AG is gone.

[Partial]

I am happy with 5-1 like everyone else, and I am not satisfied with the run game, like everyone else. We all hope it improves, and are hoping we have the personnel to do it this season.

If we don't, then changes will be made, I'm sure. If it costs us down the road in terms of having success or winning ballgames, I'm sure fans will be upset. GM's try and plan for a lot. A-Rod is the planned successor to Favre. I'm not sure TT had a really solid succession plan at RB. As someone else pointed out in a previous thread where I commented on this, TT thought that AG was going to resign with us and got caught flat-footed when Houston gave him stupid money. The free agency market wasn't a great option either. We had Morency from last year's trade, Jackson, Wynn and Grant through this year's draft and an end of training camp trade. We had Arliss Beach and PJ Pope as raw prospects. Noah Herron was a good utility guy. The sum of the parts was either too injured or too little experience. What was needed IMO was better planning. We drafted running backs this year as a reaction to a need. We also drafted a DT in the first round this year as the best player available, not necessarily for immediate need. It seems like TT did not plan as well for the succession of Ahman Green as he could have. I wish he had read the tea leaves back when he first started to realize that AG had an expiring contract and had some miles on the tires. Should have brought in his successor back then to compete with him. Not a specialty, 3rd down type back, but a legit, tote the rock 20-25 times a game type back. I don't have names to suggest. I'm just suggesting that it did not sneak up on him, he just left too much to chance by not drafting running backs in his first two drafts, but settling for diamonds in the rough, or relatively unproven, undeveloped talent to be our running game. Yes, the injuries are a tough reality, and the inexperience is not the player's fault. They are who they are and where they are right now in their careers. TT needed to take a little more care in planning our group of RB's instead of having so many young, untested guys. Too bad we are not sitting on a RB who was drafted in the same draft as A-Rod who is now a big time contributor, now that AG is gone.

Good post. So I gotta ask, are you a Tarheel or a Blue Devil fan?

[Carolina_Packer]

I am happy with 5-1 like everyone else, and I am not satisfied with the run game, like everyone else. We all hope it improves, and are hoping we have the personnel to do it this season.

If we don't, then changes will be made, I'm sure. If it costs us down the road in terms of having success or winning ballgames, I'm sure fans will be upset. GM's try and plan for a lot. A-Rod is the planned successor to Favre. I'm not sure TT had a really solid succession plan at RB. As someone else pointed out in a previous thread where I commented on this, TT thought that AG was going to resign with us and got caught flat-footed when Houston gave him stupid money. The free agency market wasn't a great option either. We had Morency from last year's trade, Jackson, Wynn and Grant through this year's draft and an end of training camp trade. We had Arliss Beach and PJ Pope as raw prospects. Noah Herron was a good utility guy. The sum of the parts was either too injured or too little experience. What was needed IMO was better planning. We drafted running backs this year as a reaction to a need. We also drafted a DT in the first round this year as the best player available, not necessarily for immediate need. It seems like TT did not plan as well for the succession of Ahman Green as he could have. I wish he had read the tea leaves back when he first started to realize that AG had an expiring contract and had some miles on the tires. Should have brought in his successor back then to compete with him. Not a specialty, 3rd down type back, but a legit, tote the rock 20-25 times a game type back. I don't have names to suggest. I'm just suggesting that it did not sneak up on him, he just left too much to chance by not drafting running backs in his first two drafts, but settling for diamonds in the rough, or relatively unproven, undeveloped talent to be our running game. Yes, the injuries are a tough reality, and the inexperience is not the player's fault. They are who they are and where they are right now in their careers. TT needed to take a little more care in planning our group of RB's instead of having so many young, untested guys. Too bad we are not sitting on a RB who was drafted in the same draft as A-Rod who is now a big time contributor, now that AG is gone.

Good post. So I gotta ask, are you a Tarheel or a Blue Devil fan?

Neither actually, although their basketball games are fun to watch. I'm a transplant from MN, but grew up in Iowa, so I'm still a Hawkeye at heart. However, I was born in WI, which is how I became a Packer fan. I just happened to move to Iowa when I was 10 and started following sports. I'm sure I would have been a Badger fan if we had not moved away. We used to go to WI hockey when I was a little squirt at the Dane Co. Coliseum; good memories. Unfortunately there was no hockey in Iowa!

[SkinBasket]

Yeah, let's extend the gambler who plays the lower odds of quantity over quality.

Like when he gambled reaching for Driver and Tauscher in the 7th?


Fortunately for you, I won't say "I told you so".

What did you ever say that you could possibly be in a position to say "I told you so," in the first place?

[HarveyWallbangers]

There are Super Bowl champions that had flaws (Tampa Bay and Baltimore had brutal offenses, Indianapolis won with a bad defense that turned it around in the playoffs, Pittsburgh won with not much of a passing game, Chicago went to the Super Bowl with Rex Grossman). I'm not saying we are going to the Super Bowl, but you seldom find a team without any flaws--even Super Bowl champions. It's not like Thompson was going to build every part of the team to be mint. Just hope that he did well enough building the passing game, defense, and special teams that it can continue to overcome a bad running game.

[Partial]

There are Super Bowl champions that had flaws (Tampa Bay and Baltimore had brutal offenses, Indianapolis won with a bad defense that turned it around in the playoffs, Pittsburgh won with not much of a passing game, Chicago went to the Super Bowl with Rex Grossman). I'm not saying we are going to the Super Bowl, but you seldom find a team without any flaws--even Super Bowl champions. It's not like Thompson was going to build every part of the team to be mint. Just hope that he did well enough building the passing game, defense, and special teams that it can continue to overcome a bad running game.

I feel like people do not understand this. NE is as close to a team without a flaw and I still question the strength of their secondary.

[RashanGary]

I agree, HW.

It's very easy to scream "THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!" over one or two positions. After the 4-12 season, it might be the first reaction at any sign of problems.

Thay are a good team though. They might not have a good running game, but defense, special teams and offense combined, they are better than most teams in the NFL.

[Carolina_Packer]

We'll see how far their backs can take them. With any luck, the technique will improve, the line will start to gel on run blocking and our backs will be able to take advantage and gain some positive yardage. You don't have to be able to run the ball against the Tampa or Buc 2 defense, but man it sure would help. Then the passing game doesn't have to be that much better or consistent to make up for the running game. I sure hope they can come out against Denver and establish a run game. But again, if McCarthy was forced to go away from the run in order to play to the pass and win ballgames, that's what really matters. Also, our defense and special teams can have a big impact.

[superfan]

There are Super Bowl champions that had flaws (Tampa Bay and Baltimore had brutal offenses, Indianapolis won with a bad defense that turned it around in the playoffs, Pittsburgh won with not much of a passing game, Chicago went to the Super Bowl with Rex Grossman). I'm not saying we are going to the Super Bowl, but you seldom find a team without any flaws--even Super Bowl champions. It's not like Thompson was going to build every part of the team to be mint. Just hope that he did well enough building the passing game, defense, and special teams that it can continue to overcome a bad running game.

I feel like people do not understand this. NE is as close to a team without a flaw and I still question the strength of their secondary.

Amen to both of these posts x 1000.

[RashanGary]

Packers defense is 6th in scoring
Offense is 11th
Record: 5-1

Overall, the Packers are the 4th best team as far as outscoring their opponents. All of this with a pretty tough schedule.

[RashanGary]

They look like one of the 6 or 7 teams with a legit chance at the SB right now. Unfortunately, 3 of them in the AFC would have a better chance of winning it than any of the NFC teams.

[b bulldog]

IMO, with the running game the way it is, they are not legit. They will never beat the likes of the Cowboys and the powers in the AFC with this terrible running game.

[Rastak]

IMO, with the running game the way it is, they are not legit. They will never beat the likes of the Cowboys and the powers in the AFC with this terrible running game.


The Vikings had no passing game and absolutely had a shot at beating the Cowboys. Blocked field goal was the game turner.....