Igor Olshansky

[Patler]

See, I think Wolf was more truthful than not. People believed him. People don't believe Thompson.

That is the really ironic part. Wolf was believed, yet he mislead routinely. Thompson is disliked and not trusted, yet everyone who works with him has said he is as honest and as trustworthy as anyone they have ever dealt with.

In the end, it is their public speaking ability that they have been judged on. Wolf could lie to the press in very convincing ways. Thompson is a hesitating speaker, which give the impression of deceitfulness.

[retailguy]

Let's say Ted had gone publicly ga-ga over Canty. He wants the guy, has to have him. So how might Canty's agent respond to that...hmmm....I wonder.

Retail, look at the owners who do broadcast their plans - the Jerry Joneses and the Dan Snyders. No doubt about who they want, right? And they get who they want, mostly.

I'll betcha Haynesworth doesn't turn out to be worth near what he's paid. Not near. T.O. wasn't worth what he was paid, not after the first season, anyway.

I just don't think some big plan announcement is going to do anyone any good. TT's plan, generally, is clear. But why would he go into specifics about the players he wants to draft or sign?

Fritz, that isn't really the point. Others have claimed that Ted's "clamming" up is good for business, because it keeps other teams from "knowing our wants".

Then, Canty goes on record by accepting an offer before he even visited, that he doesn't want to "play ball" with GB. Why? Gee, could it be because he believes that Ted won't make a competitive offer? Again, what kind of competitive advantage is that? What are we getting for Ted's silence? I don't see the return on investment. I don't even see "mis-direction" opportunities, because no one even asks Ted anymore, because he has a "reputation" for not talking, and apparently has a "reputation" for not dealing either. Good thing he's got a reputation for above average drafting...

I don't see the 'competitive advantage'.

[Patler]

Then, Canty goes on record by accepting an offer before he even visited, that he doesn't want to "play ball" with GB. Why? Gee, could it be because he believes that Ted won't make a competitive offer? Again, what kind of competitive advantage is that? What are we getting for Ted's silence? I don't see the return on investment. I don't even see "mis-direction" opportunities, because no one even asks Ted anymore, because he has a "reputation" for not talking, and apparently has a "reputation" for not dealing either. Good thing he's got a reputation for above average drafting...

I don't see the 'competitive advantage'.

Why he did what he did is all just speculation, and proclamations from agents are always for a purpose, sometimes for the advantage of other clients of theirs. In a lot of ways it is like an auctioneer, who will drag out some biddings, but will sell the next very quickly to show bidders that they have to jump in. It is a standard tactic to drive up prices overall. It is generally good for the seller and bad for the buyer.

Did I read somewhere that Canty lived for most of his pre-college life in New York City? Or was that one of the other FAs? I think it was Canty. Whether it was or not, he was there, with an offer, and the Giants surely applied the pressure of "take it or leave it, it might not be here later," a standard negotiating ploy. Responding to that is the worst thing another suitor can do. Canty needed to call the Giants bluff, if he was truly interested in assessing options from others.

Of course, I could not care less about any one plyer, be it a draft pick, UFA or Packer re-signing. I never get concerned over any single player. It is kind of like buying a car or a house; you might really like one, but others will do and in the end it is value that is important.

[cpk1994]

"Lay out the plan" I'm sure all the other GM's would love to see him do that. Anyone watching how TT does business knows what the plan is--get as many good guys as you can in the draft and sign whatever free agents or do whatever trades you can do without busting the cap or threatening team cohesion. We know he is looking for players. The only thing we don't know is which players and what he is willing to pay them. And, NO ONE should know that until the deal is done.

Yep, I get your point. Didn't seem to affect Wolf though.....

The "Wolf Era" was a totally different time. He could afford to be more candid. For most of it, the Packers were one of only a few teams able to play in the free agent market. Most teams were cutting players left and right just to get under the salary cap. Some would sign big free agents, but would cut 3 or 4 solid players to do it. The June 1 waivers used to contain scads of very good players who had just become too expensive. Now days, most teams are able to keep the best of their own, and the competition for those that hit the market is fairly broad.

Hard to belief, but the Wolf era has been over for almost 10 years. The NFL that he operated in 10-20 years ago is really quite different from the NFL today.

And lets not forget that Wolf's candid ways and his mouth got him into trouble. As an example the Ray Rhodes hiring and then his firing as well.

[retailguy]

Why he did what he did is all just speculation, and proclamations from agents are always for a purpose, sometimes for the advantage of other clients of theirs. In a lot of ways it is like an auctioneer, who will drag out some biddings, but will sell the next very quickly to show bidders that they have to jump in. It is a standard tactic to drive up prices overall. It is generally good for the seller and bad for the buyer.

Did I read somewhere that Canty lived for most of his pre-college life in New York City? Or was that one of the other FAs? I think it was Canty. Whether it was or not, he was there, with an offer, and the Giants surely applied the pressure of "take it or leave it, it might not be here later," a standard negotiating ploy. Responding to that is the worst thing another suitor can do. Canty needed to call the Giants bluff, if he was truly interested in assessing options from others.

Of course, I could not care less about any one plyer, be it a draft pick, UFA or Packer re-signing. I never get concerned over any single player. It is kind of like buying a car or a house; you might really like one, but others will do and in the end it is value that is important.

So, how many times does this have to happen before you can establish a "trend"? Similar situations have gone on during Ted's entire tenure here. There have been more than a few times where players have bypassed GB for this to be "one" event. It has passed enough singular situations, that I see a trend.

I don't know a thing about Canty, don't know whether he'd have been a good fit or not. Don't know if Olshansky "fits" either. But the comments that I have read related to this deal bother me.

Does it bother anyone else that it was reported that on the opening weekend of Free Agency, GB gave its coaches the weekend off? What message does that send to the NFL and the free agency players if true?

Patler, I believe that Ted is sending messages by what he "doesn't say". My curiousity revolves around whether the messages heard by the league and fans are the ones he "intends" to send.

Only Ted knows for sure, because no one knows if he really wanted Canty, or anyone else. If I don't know, as a fan, that's not a big deal. But, if Canty's agent doesn't know, then, well, that is a problem.

[swede]

Is he Packer People?

Well, he's not hurt, so that helps. But he has a reputation for being "indifferent" during practice...

Maybe he only SEEMS indifferent because he's having trouble with the lingo.


"Emergency! Emergency! Everybody to get from street!"

[Partial]

Apparently, the Packers are looking Olshansky, Marques Douglas, and Mike Wright--all 3-4 DEs. At least, it appears they are aware that they need DEs.

We need two of the 3. Don't care which two. They're just bigeons to plug the run anyway.

[ThunderDan]

Is he Packer People?

Well, he's not hurt, so that helps. But he has a reputation for being "indifferent" during practice...

Maybe he only SEEMS indifferent because he's having trouble with the lingo.


"Emergency! Emergency! Everybody to get from street!"

Wow, a quotation from, "The Russians are Coming."

[Patler]

So, how many times does this have to happen before you can establish a "trend"? Similar situations have gone on during Ted's entire tenure here. There have been more than a few times where players have bypassed GB for this to be "one" event. It has passed enough singular situations, that I see a trend.

I don't know a thing about Canty, don't know whether he'd have been a good fit or not. Don't know if Olshansky "fits" either. But the comments that I have read related to this deal bother me.

Does it bother anyone else that it was reported that on the opening weekend of Free Agency, GB gave its coaches the weekend off? What message does that send to the NFL and the free agency players if true?

Patler, I believe that Ted is sending messages by what he "doesn't say". My curiousity revolves around whether the messages heard by the league and fans are the ones he "intends" to send.

Only Ted knows for sure, because no one knows if he really wanted Canty, or anyone else. If I don't know, as a fan, that's not a big deal. But, if Canty's agent doesn't know, then, well, that is a problem.

Doesn't bother me a bit that he gave the coaches the weekend off. Apparently most were there anyway. It was said they always have the weekend after the combine off, and it is the only weekend available between now and forever for them to have one off because of other things like camps, draft prep, etc. I would rather they take off "crazy money weekend," when guys like Colin Cole get the contract he did, than a different weekend when useful things go on. Besides, it wouldn't have made any difference even if they were there. That didn't stop them from getting Canty or anyone else.

You seem to suggest that the Packers are something different than everyone else in the NFL. I doubt they are. I think there are two camps, those that jump in aggressively on day 1 of free agency and those who take a more cautious approach. I don't think only the Packers are in the second group.

If you don't know whether Canty was worth it or not, why are you seemingly so upset that Thompson didn't put on a big push to get him? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

[Patler]

Patler, I believe that Ted is sending messages by what he "doesn't say". My curiousity revolves around whether the messages heard by the league and fans are the ones he "intends" to send.

Only Ted knows for sure, because no one knows if he really wanted Canty, or anyone else. If I don't know, as a fan, that's not a big deal. But, if Canty's agent doesn't know, then, well, that is a problem.

Canty's agent knows. The league knows. The Packers message is clear. They will pay fair money to good players. The will provide a great environment in which to be a football player and to concentrate on football. They will not participate in a feeding frenzy for any free agent.

[mission]

Patler, I believe that Ted is sending messages by what he "doesn't say". My curiousity revolves around whether the messages heard by the league and fans are the ones he "intends" to send.

Only Ted knows for sure, because no one knows if he really wanted Canty, or anyone else. If I don't know, as a fan, that's not a big deal. But, if Canty's agent doesn't know, then, well, that is a problem.

Canty's agent knows. The league knows. The Packers message is clear. They will pay fair money to good players. The will provide a great environment in which to be a football player and to concentrate on football. They will not participate in a feeding frenzy for any free agent.

Yet so many act so surprised to see it play out ...

I was disappointed just for the fact that we didn't get him. I was obviously following it very closely but that doesnt mean just acquiring the guy blindly ... if we would have paid him $10m/yr I would have had a completely different view. Players aren't/can't be assessed strictly based on performance. Value is the word that's been thrown around a lot lately and that has to be the consideration.

[Fritz]

The only exception to that "value" word....in my estimation, is the way it's used vis a vis the drdaft. What the hell is a "value" pick? A guy who has a big name but slides a bit is a "value" pick? What does that even mean? Can he play or not?

At the time, no one would've said Donald Driver was a value pick in the seventh round. But in retrospect, he sure was.

When the Pack drafted Darrell Thompson in I think the fourth round it was seen as a "value" pick. What the heck did that mean? Guy sucked, from the beginning to the end.

[mission]

The only exception to that "value" word....in my estimation, is the way it's used vis a vis the drdaft. What the hell is a "value" pick? A guy who has a big name but slides a bit is a "value" pick? What does that even mean? Can he play or not?

At the time, no one would've said Donald Driver was a value pick in the seventh round. But in retrospect, he sure was.

When the Pack drafted Darrell Thompson in I think the fourth round it was seen as a "value" pick. What the heck did that mean? Guy sucked, from the beginning to the end.

Good post. It's really impossible to nail that at the time of the draft and has always been a nice way to somehow validate a questionable (for some reason, off field, or otherwise) pick.

What's the exact definition of value as it pertains to FA? Factors are obviously expected/past performance, contract, age, need, etc ... I'm sure Patler or Waldo could come up with a nifty little equation. :P

[retailguy]

If you don't know whether Canty was worth it or not, why are you seemingly so upset that Thompson didn't put on a big push to get him? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Patler, it isn't about Canty specifically. What happened with Canty has played out in one form or another on several occasions. I think I see the beginnings of a trend.

Also, I have concerns with several articles that I've read lately. I don't share your optimistic perspective that Thompson has been clear with player agents. Free Agency is largely about the money. From time to time it is important to players to play in a certain place. In Canty's case, if you believe Peter King, the Giants were NINTH on the list. You can hardly claim he "wanted" to play there more than anywhere else.

I guess, I think I know the answer to "Why" he didn't want to visit GB. Yeah, it's speculation, yeah, I'll never prove it, but it's my view. That's what I see as concerning, not Canty specifically.

[RashanGary]

UFA, by nature, drives prices through the roof. Occasionally there is a good piece at a fair price but mostly it's decent players getting paid like stars and then a bunch of "what if he fits in my scheme and finally becomes something", "what if he's finally healthy". More often than not, teams get burned by UFA. So long as Ted keeps lockign up his own and adds talent faster than it diminishes, this team should keep taking steady steps forward, eventually over the top if he's as good as I think he is. Oh, and I'm sure he'll keep sprinkling in the UFA's like he has. Maybe not as much as some would like, but I love that agents can't lure him into these crazy bidding wars. That contract Nate Clements got a year or two ago is what happens there. Just think, if we had upped our offer 1 mil per year, we coulda had Canty for about 50 million. I'm sure that's just as good as extending a guy like Jennings or Rodgers.