Texans may cut Ahman Green

[retailguy]

Things always seem to be simple when they're right and very complicated when they're wrong. Just my experience.

If this were the case in the Ahman situation, then I believe one of two things would also have been the case. 1. There would not have been an increase in the offer to Green, or 2. We'd be able to explain WHY there was an increased offer on the table looking at other factors. In this case, the only clear thing is that the Texans had a larger offer on the table.

I think those of you who look at the injury situation and say "There, SEE" are oversimplifiing. Ahman's injury history and age were definitely one factor, but I don't even believe that they were a major factor. See, the initial offer was reported at $3m per season, and the second $5m per season.

So, I'm supposed to believe that Thompson kept the purse strings tight because he feared injury, yet he was willing to pay as high as $5m even though he KNEW it was likely that Ahman would get injured? This makes zero sense. The injury concern had to be resolved to a certain degree or you don't even make the offer.... I just don't see Ted as the type of guy that sits in his office and says, "Well, I'll pay the guy $5m to sit on IR, but I won't pay him $8m to sit there"....

I still don't understand why you fault the team management for offering Green what they felt he was worth to open negotiations and then increasing the offer later when Green felt he was worth more and there was interest from other parties. It's called negotiation. Apparently GB's management knew better than Houston's to pay him what he got. I don't understand how that equates to not "speaking highly of the organization."

I think Ted really truly believed that no one would offer Ahman an acceptable free agent contract and that he could have him at his price. I also believe that Ted thought his value was much higher than the offer he made. To me, after what Ahman had done and meant to this organization you just don't do that. You risk alienating a good employee over $2m? I dont' see it. Isn't it reasonable to conclude that Ted thought Ahman worth $5m if that's what he offered in the end? And, then, the next leap says, if offered $5m before FA would Green had gone to FA, or just taken it?

In hindsight, I truly believe I'd have been less pissed if Ted had just stuck to the offer he made. If he truly evaluated things as all of you claim then he made a fair offer, he should've stuck with it.

An opening offer is one thing, but when it's not accepted, you have to decide whether you're going to "die on the mountain" or you're going to make another offer. Thompson chose to stand his ground and he got burned, then he chose to trade for Grant and got lucky.

I just believe that someone of Green's stature in the organization deserved a better "negotiation" than he got. You could make the same case for Wahle, Henderson and Favre for sure.

I see a pattern. I don't like it. You can disagree and that's fine, but business typically doesn't "skimp" with regard to it's "best employees". They make a fair offer and let the chips fall where they may. Ted doesn't from outside appearances operate this way.

[SkinBasket]

In this case, the only clear thing is that the Texans had a larger offer on the table.

And to be honest, that's the only thing that I care about. I think you're making too much out of this whole increased offer thing - something that happens in almost every FA negotiation. In the end, Green went somewhere else for a price that was higher than GB was willing to match. You can come up with all kinds of nefarious reasons why they wouldn't match the offer, but the simplest still seems like the most likely. The simplest reasons also turned out to be valid reasons. You can call that some kind of cosmic coincidence if you want, but I'm willing to suspend my disbelief enough to think that the team knew Green better than anyone else out there, and made their decision based on how effective of a football player he could be over the duration of the contract.

I think Ted really truly believed that no one would offer Ahman an acceptable free agent contract and that he could have him at his price. I also believe that Ted thought his value was much higher than the offer he made. To me, after what Ahman had done and meant to this organization you just don't do that.

Sure you do. No matter what a player has done, you pay them for what the can do for the team, not for what they've done. Just like you don't bring an old busted ass RB back to GB just because he used to be good 5 years ago.

An opening offer is one thing, but when it's not accepted, you have to decide whether you're going to "die on the mountain" or you're going to make another offer. Thompson chose to stand his ground and he got burned, then he chose to trade for Grant and got lucky.

That's more than a little retarded to claim he got "burned" by letting an old RB who ended up being an injury magnet while also claiming he "got lucky" finding what appears to be a real talent for a 6th round pick. If you don't want to give Thompson credit for anything he's done, then just come out and say it. Don't make yourself look silly claiming it was dumb luck in both cases.

I just believe that someone of Green's stature in the organization deserved a better "negotiation" than he got. You could make the same case for Wahle, Henderson and Favre for sure.

I see a pattern. I don't like it. You can disagree and that's fine, but business typically doesn't "skimp" with regard to it's "best employees". They make a fair offer and let the chips fall where they may. Ted doesn't from outside appearances operate this way.

And I guess that's a fundamental difference between what you want out of your team management. You, and others here, seem to want to reward players for what they've done (despite already having been paid for that once already) instead of what they can do for the team. That kind of management is what caused Sherman to leave town with the Packers on the verge of financial implosion with virtually no depth anywhere on the roster.

[retailguy]

Skin, I guess this is where we agree to disagree. You continue to claim that I don't give Thompson credit for anything, yet I wrote an entire mea culpa last season, and even through this Favre thing, I said I understood some of why he did what he did. He's admitted that he screwed up the Wahle situation, and saying he "got lucky" with Grant is not unreasonable from my viewpoint. No one could forecast what Grant accomplished last season. Hell, if they could've Grant would have started week 1. He didn't, he was a LAST RESORT. You bow down over that one if you wish, but I see it differently.

This is Ted's team now, in EVERY sense of the word. Let's see what he does with it.

[HarveyWallbangers]

This is Ted's team now, in EVERY sense of the word. Let's see what he does with it.

You do realize that you were on here a lot last offseason blasting Thompson. Then, you rarely showed up during the season. You didn't post much this offseason. Then, during the Favre fiasco, you showed up again. After the first preseason game, when ARod looked solid, you made few posts. After the disaster against San Fran, you are back on here posting a lot. Rightly or wrongly, coincidence or not, there appears to be a pattern. It's like you have in your mind that the Packers will suck this year with ARod, so you are angling to give out a bunch of I told you so's.

The whole situation the last couple of years has been tiring. Brett was a great QB. Thompson has done a good job as GM. At some point, Brett was going to be gone. The team is in solid position to survive, but it will be a struggle. No matter when it happened, it was going to be a struggle. Like it or not, Thompson did put Brett in a position to get to the Super Bowl last year. Brett deservedly got a lot of glory for a great season. He also deservedly got a lot of the blame for the Giants game. Rodgers could suck and Thompson may eventually have to move on with Brohm or somebody else, but that could happen with anybody that replaced Brett.

[Maxie the Taxi]

The whole situation the last couple of years has been tiring. Brett was a great QB. Thompson has done a good job as GM. At some point, Brett was going to be gone. The team is in solid position to survive, but it will be a struggle. No matter when it happened, it was going to be a struggle. Like it or not, Thompson did put Brett in a position to get to the Super Bowl last year. Brett deservedly got a lot of glory for a great season. He also deservedly got a lot of the blame for the Giants game. Rodgers could suck and Thompson may eventually have to move on with Brohm or somebody else, but that could happen with anybody that replaced Brett.

Well said.

[retailguy]

This is Ted's team now, in EVERY sense of the word. Let's see what he does with it.

You do realize that you were on here a lot last offseason blasting Thompson. Then, you rarely showed up during the season. You didn't post much this offseason. Then, during the Favre fiasco, you showed up again. After the first preseason game, when ARod looked solid, you made few posts. After the disaster against San Fran, you are back on here posting a lot. Rightly or wrongly, coincidence or not, there appears to be a pattern. It's like you have in your mind that the Packers will suck this year with ARod, so you are angling to give out a bunch of I told you so's.

The whole situation the last couple of years has been tiring. Brett was a great QB. Thompson has done a good job as GM. At some point, Brett was going to be gone. The team is in solid position to survive, but it will be a struggle. No matter when it happened, it was going to be a struggle. Like it or not, Thompson did put Brett in a position to get to the Super Bowl last year. Brett deservedly got a lot of glory for a great season. He also deservedly got a lot of the blame for the Giants game. Rodgers could suck and Thompson may eventually have to move on with Brohm or somebody else, but that could happen with anybody that replaced Brett.

Look, you can interpret this however you like. I post when I have something to say. When I don't, I don't. I didn't "disappear" during the season, I posted occasionally but didn't have much if anything to add. Then, when I felt appropriate, I came out and said I was wrong about the Packers 2007 season.

I do post in the offseason, but more in the romper room than the packers room. I have a life outside of sports and football. If I'm not hardcore in the Jan-March timeframe then sue me.

I'm not setting anything up for an "I told you so". I want the Packers to be good. I don't like Ted Thompson. That doesn't mean he can't make them good. I don't like some of his decisions and I think his management style sucks. Sue me. If you like it, FINE.

I'm posting a lot this week, because I"M ON VACATION. Cripes, who do you think you are, SHERLOCK HOLMES? Why is it, that you can string together a "bunch" of coincidences and draw a conclusion in it should be "correct" but someone who doesn't agree with you does it, and there's a damn agenda? What kind of hypocrite are you?

Finally, as to Favre, it is one of the only times I'm truly on the "fence". Favre was an IDIOT, but Thompson wasn't much better. He elected to move on. His decision. Very bold. If it doesn't work out, hopefully some of you worshippers can see that the guy isn't perfect and is in fact an asshole, even if it turns out that he can build a football team, which I have serious reservations about, and have had for a long time. He can string some talent together, but lets see how he does with an unproven QB. Talent abounds in the NFL, production, well that's a different matter.

Times are different without Favre. He was a proven commodity. For better or worse, you knew what you got. Rodgers isn't proven with anything, but he's Ted's choice. Maybe he turns out to be better. Maybe not. Lets see.

[retailguy]

With regards to the game, I could care less whether they win or lose in the preseason. That's why they have the preseason.

What concerned me is that they were not competitive in ANY facet of the game. The first string defense was OK, but it was the FREAKING 49ERS, with JT O'sullivan as a QB....

If they had come out and played competitively and looked reasonably proficient, I wouldn't have batted an eye. That is not what I saw.

IF you believe Bedard, he said in his blog that they prepared hard for that game..... Now they're saying it was a "short week" and a "long trip". For heaven's sake, IT"S THE NFL.

McCarthy has a lot of work to do. And some hard decisions to make. They're coming off a 13-3 season, and I've got some EXPECTATIONS. So does everyone else. We'll see what these two are made of this year.

And Harv, I'll be the first one to ADMIT wrong, just like I did last year. Will the rest of these assholes? NO. It'll be excuse after excuse... After all, the West Coast is a LONG TRIP you know....

[GBRulz]

Pretty sure Thompson was right for not matching the Texans bid for Green. I admit, at the time, I was kind of pissed off that we let Green go for a few million dollars difference, but I now recognize that I was wrong and Ted was right, at least on this issue.

Yup, I was wrong, too.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Retail...methinks the lady doth protest too much.

[rbaloha1]

Good pickup for the minimum. #3 rb.

[retailguy]

Retail...methinks the lady doth protest too much.

Well, Ty, on this topic, I must say you're the expert.

I guess, I'm just irritated when the rules are different for those with similar perspectives. I guess if I spent my life on here like Harvey does, then I'd PROVE how important sports is to me....

Sadly, I've just got a few opinions and I don't really care what someone with 11,000 posts has. Me thinks he spends a little too much time here....

Notice how he just vanished.... I find that curious, but sadly typical.

[SkinBasket]

You continue to claim that I don't give Thompson credit for anything

An opening offer is one thing, but when it's not accepted, you have to decide whether you're going to "die on the mountain" or you're going to make another offer. Thompson chose to stand his ground and he got burned, then he chose to trade for Grant and got lucky.

Look, here's the thing. You continue to look at TT's moves as strange coincidences involving luck and happenstance where he happens to come away in a better position despite making moves that you don't agree with.

I take a much simpler approach that doesn't rely so much on philosophy, astrology, or religion. Ted Thompson was hired to make personnel decisions for the Packers. To decide which players to keep for how much, which to let go, and which to pursue. This is his job. When he makes two concurrent moves such as letting Green go (and it turns out Green is indeed over the hill) then opting to pick up Grant for a 6th (which, by most opinions looks to be a steal and a half), I see that as the man doing the job he was hired to do.

Yes, all GMs have hits and misses, but I'll be more satisfied when people like yourself can finally admit to themselves that maybe, just maybe, Thompson knows what he's doing and that the moves he's made that have made this team deeper, better, and, amazingly enough, cheaper, aren't dumb luck, coincidence, gaping holes in the time-space continuum, and chance happenings, but are rather something much less mystic - a man doing the job he was hired to do.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Retail...methinks the lady doth protest too much.

Well, Ty, on this topic, I must say you're the expert.

I guess, I'm just irritated when the rules are different for those with similar perspectives. I guess if I spent my life on here like Harvey does, then I'd PROVE how important sports is to me....

Sadly, I've just got a few opinions and I don't really care what someone with 11,000 posts has. Me thinks he spends a little too much time here....

Notice how he just vanished.... I find that curious, but sadly typical.

Look, you are simply wrong about Green. Regardless of contract offers or what harv says.

Call it luck or smarts...TT and the pack are better off without him.

Ahman was a good/great player...he got paid for what he did. You want to reward him...fine..mail him a check. But, only foolish gms reward 30 year old rbs.

[Scott Campbell]

I'd be in favor or picking up Ahman if he got cut. Unless Lumpkins is getting kept any of the others (Morency, Wynn) can go.

I'd be in favor of picking up Ahman so he can retire as a Packer. But winning a roster spot? No way.

[bobblehead]

You continue to claim that I don't give Thompson credit for anything

An opening offer is one thing, but when it's not accepted, you have to decide whether you're going to "die on the mountain" or you're going to make another offer. Thompson chose to stand his ground and he got burned, then he chose to trade for Grant and got lucky.

Look, here's the thing. You continue to look at TT's moves as strange coincidences involving luck and happenstance where he happens to come away in a better position despite making moves that you don't agree with.

I take a much simpler approach that doesn't rely so much on philosophy, astrology, or religion. Ted Thompson was hired to make personnel decisions for the Packers. To decide which players to keep for how much, which to let go, and which to pursue. This is his job. When he makes two concurrent moves such as letting Green go (and it turns out Green is indeed over the hill) then opting to pick up Grant for a 6th (which, by most opinions looks to be a steal and a half), I see that as the man doing the job he was hired to do.

Yes, all GMs have hits and misses, but I'll be more satisfied when people like yourself can finally admit to themselves that maybe, just maybe, Thompson knows what he's doing and that the moves he's made that have made this team deeper, better, and, amazingly enough, cheaper, aren't dumb luck, coincidence, gaping holes in the time-space continuum, and chance happenings, but are rather something much less mystic - a man doing the job he was hired to do.

Nope....Just luck, how can you call that skill and knowledge??