Thank you mike Sherman

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Plz find me where it stated, by Sherman or Wahle, that if Sherman was still the GM then Wahle would have stayed. I don't believe either of them said this.

Christl blog:

Mike Wahle said he sensed that when Mike Sherman was still general manager the Packers were prepared to pay him the $6 million roster bonus that was part of his contract. But Wahle said that all changed when Ted Thompson replaced Sherman. "When Ted came in, it was kind of known that he thought guards were an expendable commodity," said Wahle.

And so the great Bretsky turns speechless, a symbol of a defeated man.

[Scott Campbell]

Plz find me where it stated, by Sherman or Wahle, that if Sherman was still the GM then Wahle would have stayed. I don't believe either of them said this.

Christl blog:

Mike Wahle said he sensed that when Mike Sherman was still general manager the Packers were prepared to pay him the $6 million roster bonus that was part of his contract. But Wahle said that all changed when Ted Thompson replaced Sherman. "When Ted came in, it was kind of known that he thought guards were an expendable commodity," said Wahle.

And so the great Bretsky turns speechless, a symbol of a defeated man.

Do you really consider phrases like "he sensed" and "it was kind of known" to be some kind of iron clad fact? I don't.

[retailguy]

And on the issue of who was really GM for the 2001 draft, I found the following on who made the trade for the #10 pick in 2001. Look for paragraphs 17 through 21.

PBMAX,

This was posted in one of the articles that I listed earlier. I didn't cite it, because it doesn't state directly that Sherman handled the trade, only that he was on the phone with them. Put with the other "evidence" we have on the surface it seems to indicate that Sherman had some clout, but not final clout.

If you think that Sherman had final clout, then you have to consider why Wolf was on the phone with Miami. If Sherman was really "orchestrating" the trade of Hasselbeck, then why wasn't he on the phone to Miami also?

Understanding corporate structure the way we all do, isn't it reasonable to assume that the "senior management team" had a meeting in which they determined that it was best for the franchise to trade Hasselbeck. Then, Wolf, as the leader, divided up the responsibilities of "calling" other teams to see what they'd offer. It would, under this scenario, make sense for Sherman to call Seattle - all of his limited pro contacts were there. Undoubtedly, Ken Herock was on the phone, as were others, trying to drum up the best possible price for Hasselbeck. It just so happens that Sherman's contacts offered the best price.

What we don't get to know definitively, is who gave the final approval, however, matched with the other statements, this would seem to indicate that Wolf was still in charge, gave final approval, and that he was training Sherman to take over, which was stated at every press opportunity.

You could draw other conclusions, however, there isn't enough evidence, in my opinion, to indicate the "sherman was in charge scenario". Everybody went out of their way to minimize that, except for possibly Sherman. That kind of makes sense, that the promoted guy would beat his chest about his "expanded" responsibilities. We all know a co-worker like that, don't we?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Plz find me where it stated, by Sherman or Wahle, that if Sherman was still the GM then Wahle would have stayed. I don't believe either of them said this.

Christl blog:

Mike Wahle said he sensed that when Mike Sherman was still general manager the Packers were prepared to pay him the $6 million roster bonus that was part of his contract. But Wahle said that all changed when Ted Thompson replaced Sherman. "When Ted came in, it was kind of known that he thought guards were an expendable commodity," said Wahle.

And so the great Bretsky turns speechless, a symbol of a defeated man.

Do you really consider phrases like "he sensed" and "it was kind of known" to be some kind of iron clad fact? I don't.

And then the great Campbell comes to the rescue, like always.

[Bretsky]

Plz find me where it stated, by Sherman or Wahle, that if Sherman was still the GM then Wahle would have stayed. I don't believe either of them said this.

Christl blog:

Mike Wahle said he sensed that when Mike Sherman was still general manager the Packers were prepared to pay him the $6 million roster bonus that was part of his contract. But Wahle said that all changed when Ted Thompson replaced Sherman. "When Ted came in, it was kind of known that he thought guards were an expendable commodity," said Wahle.

And so the great Bretsky turns speechless, a symbol of a defeated man.

THIS IS WHAT I ASKED FOR

Plz find me where it stated, by Sherman or Wahle, that if Sherman was still the GM then Wahle would have stayed. I don't believe either of them said this.



PLEASE DON"T INSULT YOUR OWN INTELLIGENCE BY USING THE SPEWED CRAP YOU CAME UP WITH AS SOMEBODY STATING WAHLE WOULD HAVE STAYED..."SENSED"...."IT WAS KIND OF KNOWN" COME ON.

YOU SAID SHERMAN AND WAHLE STATED THAT HE WOULD HAVE STAYED.

NOW SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE, RATHER THAN THE HORSECRAP YOU PROVIDED WITH SOMEBODY SENSING SOMETHING MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED

[retailguy]

but he was still pretty bad at drafting, and handling draft picks IMO

Red,

This really gets to the heart of what this debate is all about. To reach this conclusion, you have to assume/consider that sherman was trying to draft well to build a competitive team into the future.

I do not share this view. While he tried to do this, it was not his primary focus. When you compare Sherman to Thompson you have to consider what each primary focus is. I believe them to be different, NOT THE SAME.

For example, it is clear through Thompsons statements and actions that he is building for the future, and while trying to field a competitive team this season, that is CLEARLY NOT his number one priority. His number one priority seems to be, restocking depth for a Super Bowl run at some point in the future.

Plenty of things indicate this, such as limited activity in Free Agency, lack of interest in players available via trade, limited use of waiver wire, and lack of contracts for undrafted free agent talent. He obviously places a great deal of emphasis and value on draft choices, preferring to accumulate more over focusing on one specific player and doing anything to get them. Nothing about this indicated urgency to "build a winner". It is clearly the "turtle" approach of "we'll get there, sooner or later, and we'll be solid when we finally arrive".

Now, contrast that with the manner that Mike Sherman drafted. (In my opinion, completely opposite). I don't think anyone would argue that Sherman was anything but a "needs" drafter. Why? Brett Favre. He continually assessed the team, and attacked its weakest link first. 2002 - receivers, 2003 - linebackers, 2004 - cornerbacks. It was clear, and looked at objectively, pretty transparent, I think.

Joe Johnson illustrates this perfectly. Shermans biggest need initially was a pass rush end, and he preferred to bring in an established veteran. Why? No need to develop. He needed it NOW. Also, he had no receivers. Insert Terry Glenn. Why? Proven Experience when he had NONE. Third - Draft Javon Walker. The biggest position of need were additional receivers. He had Ferguson, now he needed a big deep threat. We've got Glenn for experience, then AFTER THAT, get a guy to step in later. Fast forward to 2003, after the Nickerson bust, now we "need" a linebacker and a cornerback. Trade the #2 for Al Harris who is proven, and get the "best guy" you can find for linebacker in the draft. Then in 2004, we need a cornerback due to the McKenzie disaster. He preferred Carroll over Gamble, mainly because he valued the speed to keep up with Moss.

Sherman did this, I think, because, he had a veteran team, and the leagues best QB, coupled with an impatient fan base. If he got the team over the hump, he could "ride the wave" and begin the "rebuilding" process. Favre would "ride off into the sunset" leaving lower expectations and "time" to rebuild. I can find no indication in any of Shermans moves that he ever focused on "building for the future". The guys he drafted were always at a position of weakness and had the "potential" of filling a hole.

None of this indicates that Sherman is a crappy evaluator, nor that he was unqualified. Rather, it indicates. in my opinion, that he faced a "sense of desparation" whether that was internal or external doesn't really matter. That "desparation" got worse, clouded his judgement, and caused him to make stranger and stranger decisions as those previous decisions blew up in his face. There was no one in the organization who could say "Stop it, just Stop it" after Hatley died.

The four biggest factors, in my opinion that caused Sherman to fail, were, lack of a pass rush from the DT failures, injuries (2002), poor play calling in critical situations, and the death of Hatley who was never replaced.

If only one of these four hadn't happened, I think, he'd have got them at least to a championship game, and probably into the Super Bowl. It didn't happen, so now he's everybody's favorite punching bag. It is just unfortunate that most "fans" aren't interested in putting the puzzle pieces together and just prefer to call him names and pick on both his ability and his weight.

It defies logic that he could have ascended to the top position in the NFL hierarchy and not be qualified, and if you look at his physical appearance from 2001 - 2006, it defies logic that he wasn't totally committed to his task. Bashing him from these perspectives is not only short sighted, it's cruel and WRONG. It shows the shallowness of the "fan" doing the "critique", not the "true perspective" of Mike Sherman, the coach, or the GM.

[retailguy]

double post

[retailguy]

PLEASE DON"T INSULT YOUR OWN INTELLIGENCE BY USING THE SPEWED CRAP YOU CAME UP WITH AS SOMEBODY STATING WAHLE WOULD HAVE STAYED..."SENSED"...."IT WAS KIND OF KNOWN" COME ON.

YOU SAID SHERMAN AND WAHLE STATED THAT HE WOULD HAVE STAYED.

NOW SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE, RATHER THAN THE HORSECRAP YOU PROVIDED WITH SOMEBODY SENSING SOMETHING MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED

Passion, give me PASSION brotha.... LMAO.

Bretsky, I saw the interview with Wahle. It wasn't in writing, it was a TV spot. I think I saw it on espn, a locker room, interview. Wahle was choosing his words very carefully, but it really was clear. He believed that Sherman was going to work it out with him, and that Thompson had no intention of doing it once he arrived.

Sherman never said ANYTHING publicly about this, to my knowledge, shows what a classy guy he is, in my opinion, but all of his actions suggest he'd have worked it out. In hindsight, that may not have been the best thing as it is now clear the "window" closed for this team at the end of 2004.

Tank - a little advice if I may? - You lose whatever remaining credibility you have by failing to acknowledge that Thompson doesn't have a plan, or that the plan is to win now. If you'd focus on your belief that this team could win now, you might get more objective responses.

TT's plan isn't bad, its just not an "overnight band-aid". You seem to want a "quick fix". Bad news dude, you ain't getting one....

[RashanGary]

I disagree with almost everything you just said. You basically just made a big list of excuses for why Sherman was a bad GM.

One of the things I did agree with was the desperation. Sherman showed huge, dissappointing signs of desperation. As a coach, GREAT. As a GM WTF. I am very relieved to have Thompson as GM mostly because he speaks of how his experience shows that desperation almost alays hurts in the long run. He learned that by being in the front office of a couple successfull organizations and taking note of what went wrong and what went right. Sherman appeared to be way over his head in this department.

Thompson's main focus is value in a value driven league. You get 7 picks. You better get the best 7 or you're losing value from your draft. You have 100 mil to spend each year. YOu better get the most production from that 100 mil as possible. VALUE VALUE VALUE and then there is a matter of putting in the hard work and experience involved in knowing what is value. Thompson shows confidence in those two areas and if I had to pick 2 areas for a GM to be strong in, it would be those two. Sherman was awfull in those two areas. Sander, Carroll ect...all desperation. Johnson, Glenn, Nickerson = desperation. Horrible moves. Made the team better for a year or two, but stripped the team of long term depth. HORRIBLE.

Back to shamrocks original points. The depth of the greenbay Packers after Sherman left office was so discustingly thin that he had to be fired for both jobs out of spite. He was a joke as a GM and deserves to be and assistant in Houston. He did his best but he was awfull.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Geez, now this has become a war of words. Since we are fighting a war of words, let me repeat what i wrote:

Based on Sherman's track record of retaining his (or Wolfs) players, Sherman didnt anticipate losing Wahle. Sherman said it himself somewhere for JSO regarding Wahle. Wahle said it himself too, that if Sherman was still GM, he would still be a Pack. And based on his track record, Sherman wouldve gotten Wahle back. And based on his record of drafting for need, its likely Sherman wouldve drafted an OL, likely Mankins, with the 1st rd pick last year, or trade one of his 2nd for a proven guard or draft one in rd 2 or 3. Thompson waited until the 5th rd to draft a OL.

Sherman did not anticipate losing Wahle. Sherman said he wouldve gotten something done with Wahle and Rivera. If you read the reports on JSO daily you'll notice it. It is their archieves. Im not gonna waste time researching it. Call it proable fact, whatever, but if you didnt notice then you are uninformed. It is there. I got the first qoute from other thread in here.

Pay Wahle the $6 M bonus and he wouldnt be a FA. He would still be a Pack right? If Sherman opted to pay Wahle that money, he'd have no choice but to remain a Pack, unless he decides to hold out and demand a trade. The option to pay Wahle the bonus was on the Packers, not Wahle. Much like a team has the choice to designate a player as franchiase player. The Pack had the choice to extend Wahles contract by paying him the bonus or release him. Thompson chose to release him. Once released Wahle becomes a FA, and he, not the Packers, gets the final say on where he wants to go. In other words, Wahles fate lies first in the hands of the Packers becasue Wahle would continue to remain under contract with the team had they opted to pay him the bonus. Thompson opted to release him and made him a FA. But if thompson had paid Wahle the bonus, he'd still be a Packer today. Who was GM last year and who fucked up?

[Bossman641]

Retailguy,

I agree with your take on Sherman 100%. He knew what he needed and he went out and attempted to get it, unfortunately things didn't go his way. At the time, I believe that was the type of GM that the team needed.

Sherman became so focused on what exactly the team needed at that point in time that he began to make even worse decisions. Sherman was basically racing against the clock, and it was only a time before this couldn't be done any longer.

[retailguy]

Retailguy,

I agree with your take on Sherman 100%. He knew what he needed and he went out and attempted to get it, unfortunately things didn't go his way. At the time, I believe that was the type of GM that the team needed.

Sherman became so focused on what exactly the team needed at that point in time that he began to make even worse decisions. Sherman was basically racing against the clock, and it was only a time before this couldn't be done any longer.

Thanks bossman - hopefully you won't get labeled as some "non-thinking" kool-aid homer. If you do, I've got some "spare" backup avatars you can borrow.

I have really spent some time reflecting on this, and I think I know who Sherman was.... Some would call that boring, I kind of enjoyed it....

[red]

first off, you don't pick the 5 foot 10 ahmad carroll to cover rany moss at all. i don't care how fast the guy is

fine, so what, he picked to win then instead of picking to build for the future, THE GUYS HE PICKED, STILL FUCKING SUCKED, didn't help him win then (with the exception of javon for 1 year, and barnett), and they sure as hell aren't helping now

sherman should have traded all his picks away to get proven vets, he was a lot better at that then trying to judge the college guys

and the free agents he signed, his own guys he resigned, and the vets he traded for, HAVE NO FUCKING PLACE IN THIS THREAD, the thread is about the shit drfats sherman had, and the shitty players he drafted

[retailguy]

I disagree with almost everything you just said. You basically just made a big list of excuses for why Sherman was a bad GM.

One of the things I did agree with was the desperation. Sherman showed huge, dissappointing signs of desperation. As a coach, GREAT. As a GM WTF. I am very relieved to have Thompson as GM mostly because he speaks of how his experience shows that desperation almost alays hurts in the long run. He learned that by being in the front office of a couple successfull organizations and taking note of what went wrong and what went right. Sherman appeared to be way over his head in this department.

Thompson's main focus is value in a value driven league. You get 7 picks. You better get the best 7 or you're losing value from your draft. You have 100 mil to spend each year. YOu better get the most production from that 100 mil as possible. VALUE VALUE VALUE and then there is a matter of putting in the hard work and experience involved in knowing what is value. Thompson shows confidence in those two areas and if I had to pick 2 areas for a GM to be strong in, it would be those two. Sherman was awfull in those two areas. Sander, Carroll ect...all desperation. Johnson, Glenn, Nickerson = desperation. Horrible moves. Made the team better for a year or two, but stripped the team of long term depth. HORRIBLE.

Back to shamrocks original points. The depth of the greenbay Packers after Sherman left office was so discustingly thin that he had to be fired for both jobs out of spite. He was a joke as a GM and deserves to be and assistant in Houston. He did his best but he was awfull.

Nick, your whole perspective is based on what you, or what the "masses" believe that a GM sould do. A GM has choices. Some are good and some are bad, but neither makes one "unqualified" per se. Society determines "good" and "bad" after the fact, based upon the results.

You believe that there is only ONE way to build a winner, however plenty of teams have "tooled up" for one shot. The Ravens made it, and the early Panthers almost made it. The Raiders have built a franchise on this model, and it has had mixed results for them. Undoubtedly there are others.

Point for you to consider is, you've got Brett Favre, what do you do? You'll get criticized no matter what, but if you're a loyal guy, you'll do everything you can to get him the prize....won't you? Tell me, objectively, that IS NOT what Sherman did...

[retailguy]

first off, you don't pick the 5 foot 10 ahmad carroll to cover rany moss at all. i don't care how fast the guy is

fine, so what, he picked to win then instead of picking to build for the future, THE GUYS HE PICKED, STILL FUCKING SUCKED, didn't help him win then (with the exception of javon for 1 year, and barnett), and they sure as hell aren't helping now

sherman should have traded all his picks away to get proven vets, he was a lot better at that then trying to judge the college guys

and the free agents he signed, his own guys he resigned, and the vets he traded for, HAVE NO FUCKING PLACE IN THIS THREAD, the thread is about the shit drfats sherman had, and the shitty players he drafted

Red,

I didn't say carroll was the "right" decision, I said what I thought the decision was based upon. It seems that statements were made to this effect at some point.

I don't know whether or not Sherman would have had success or not picking free agents but a case could be made that he was better at picking established players than draft choices. But if you factor in the "primary focus" then maybe not. This is truly a judgement call because we can't see the "other choices" because they never happened.

Finally, who the hell are you to tell us what belongs or doesn't belong? How can you "objectively evaluate" a GM without factoring in the WHOLE JOB? If this statement doesn't show your "anti Sherman" bias, I don't know what will. thanks for exposing yourself.... LMAO.