Blind Faith: Is this TT's last year at GM?

[sharpe1027]

To stay on topic....Snake likes TT, but damn if he doesn't need to get a beast to do something for once as a rookie THIS YEAR. Wells, Crabtree...are/will be prob. great, but if he busts with a stud contributor with his lack of FA/trades, then we may go 6-10 again, as our "core" is about what it is...average, and not getting much better. Who then, is our stud (out of nowhere potential Pro-Bowler) from out last couple of years picks? Humor Snake, but the talent is not there..JH might be pretty good, but anyone else? This is the whole point, we need to get a stud-need pick this year, else we may go 1-5 under TT and miss the 2009 playoffs. Great teams draft studs. We don't do that.

Snake, I still don't think I understand your logic. I can understand the worry about the end results, but this perception that the Packers don't use free agency has never been explained to me.

To me it seems that the Packers have had some very good successes in Free Agency and have yet to have a big failure that kills their salary cap. They currently have 3-4 starters on the Defensive side of the ball from free agency (Woodson, Pickett, Chillar, Bigby). This is from only the past few years. As far as studs, one of those players was in the running for defensive player of the year. It doesn't get much better than that.

What exactly are your expectations for free agency? A Woodson caliber signing every year? Have you stopped to compare your expectations with what the majority of other teams do in free agency? I swear some people think that every free agent signing that the Packers don't make goes to the same mythical team.

Now that the Packers have made a few free agent signings again this year I have watched the complaints shift to this nebulous "playmaker" or "stud" argument. I don't buy it.

[cheesner]

Not so much..Not to base on argument on The Sporting News, but their draft/analysis makes them the "best" print media for NFL draft analysis.

The latest Sporting News did any interesting rating/look at the last 5 drafts for EVERY team (although subjective it did list how someone is an elite player...Pro Bowls or massive stats for their position). The Steelers got a very high drafting grade for the past 5 years with 4 "elite" players...aka studs with far fewer draft picks than TT has had (49). With those 49 (by far the highest in the NFL over the last 5 years), Ted has hit 1 elite player.

This is the whole point. He's laying his eggs in 1 basket. He knows talent, but they gave him a C (and Snake couldn't argue that either...49 picks, 1 elite, and comparing it to other teams, many busted picks, many gone off the roster). So to stay objective, his drafting has been lackluster. Go read it, it's a good read, and Snake isn't here to bust TT's balls, just saying he really needs to get some "difference makers" through the draft, not just average players.

As far as an above post made about FA...yes Woodson is a beast...but all the resignings are OK too, but none of them "made us better"....we "already" had them. Great we locked them up, but so many NFL teams do that nowadays. I hate FA, but most teams lock up the core, WE "under TT" are no different than most all teams. The elite teams draft elite players to continue their playoff excursions...We do not under Ted.

That Sporting News article made several valid, factual posts about drafting in the last 5 years...TT is quite average at best at the draft regardless of his enormous amount of picks. The old adage is "you get what you pay for" and it's pretty true.

To stay on topic....Snake likes TT, but damn if he doesn't need to get a beast to do something for once as a rookie THIS YEAR. Wells, Crabtree...are/will be prob. great, but if he busts with a stud contributor with his lack of FA/trades, then we may go 6-10 again, as our "core" is about what it is...average, and not getting much better. Who then, is our stud (out of nowhere potential Pro-Bowler) from out last couple of years picks? Humor Snake, but the talent is not there..JH might be pretty good, but anyone else? This is the whole point, we need to get a stud-need pick this year, else we may go 1-5 under TT and miss the 2009 playoffs. Great teams draft studs. We don't do that.

TT has only been involved with 4 drafts not 5. 5 drafts ago the Steelers hit on Rothlesberger and Max Starks while the Mike Sherman directed Packers added such talent Carrol, Joey Thomas, Donnell Washington. That has skewed the results. Since TT has been in charge here is the comparison:

Packers	Steelers
IMPACT	
Greg Jennings	LaMarr Woodley
Aaron Rodgers	Santonio Holmes
Nick Collins	   Heath Miller
	
	
STARTERS	
Daryn Colledge	Willie Colon
A.J. Hawk	        Chris Kemoeatu
Johnny Jolly	Charles Davis
Jason Spitz	
Korey Hall	
Brady Poppinga	
Mason Crosby	
	
ON TEAM 	
Josh Sitton	              Lawrence Timmons
Jordy Nelson	      Rashard Mendenhall
Desmond Bishop	      Limas Sweed
Brandon Jackson	      William Gay
James Jones	       Trai Essex
Justin Harrell	       Tony Hills
Jeremy Thompson	Bryant McFadden
Jermichael Finley  	Bruce Davis
DeShawn Wynn	        Matt Spaeth
Tony Moll	                Dennis Dixon
Will Blackmon	
Matt Flynn	
Mike Montgomery	
Patrick Lee	
Breno Giacomini	
Brian Brohm	
Allen Barbre	
Aaron Rouse	
Brett Swain	
	
GONE	
Abdul Hodge	        Noah Herron
William Whitticker 	Anthony Smith
Michael Hawkins	        Willie Reid
Tyrone Culver	         Shaun Nua
Marviel Underwood	Ryan Mundy
Kurt Campbell	Ryan McBean
Junius Coston	Rian Wallace
Ingle Martin	Orien Harris
David Clowney	Omar Jacobs
Dave Tollefson	Mike Humpal
Craig Bragg	Marvin Philip
Cory Rodgers	Fred Gibson
Clark Harris	Daniel Sepulveda
Terrence Murphy	Dallas Baker
         	        Cedric Humes
                	Cameron Stephenson

Maybe I am a bit of a homer, but I like our drafts better.

Things to consider:

Packers should have more starters because they are less deep than the Steelers

Very subjective in determining who constitutes an 'impact' player

I think several of the Packer ON TEAM column will be starters soon and some of the STARTERS could become IMPACT this season.

Packers have had higher draft position than the Steelers and should do better.

[SnakeLH2006]

Not so much..Not to base on argument on The Sporting News, but their draft/analysis makes them the "best" print media for NFL draft analysis.

The latest Sporting News did any interesting rating/look at the last 5 drafts for EVERY team (although subjective it did list how someone is an elite player...Pro Bowls or massive stats for their position). The Steelers got a very high drafting grade for the past 5 years with 4 "elite" players...aka studs with far fewer draft picks than TT has had (49). With those 49 (by far the highest in the NFL over the last 5 years), Ted has hit 1 elite player.

This is the whole point. He's laying his eggs in 1 basket. He knows talent, but they gave him a C (and Snake couldn't argue that either...49 picks, 1 elite, and comparing it to other teams, many busted picks, many gone off the roster). So to stay objective, his drafting has been lackluster. Go read it, it's a good read, and Snake isn't here to bust TT's balls, just saying he really needs to get some "difference makers" through the draft, not just average players.

As far as an above post made about FA...yes Woodson is a beast...but all the resignings are OK too, but none of them "made us better"....we "already" had them. Great we locked them up, but so many NFL teams do that nowadays. I hate FA, but most teams lock up the core, WE "under TT" are no different than most all teams. The elite teams draft elite players to continue their playoff excursions...We do not under Ted.

That Sporting News article made several valid, factual posts about drafting in the last 5 years...TT is quite average at best at the draft regardless of his enormous amount of picks. The old adage is "you get what you pay for" and it's pretty true.

To stay on topic....Snake likes TT, but damn if he doesn't need to get a beast to do something for once as a rookie THIS YEAR. Wells, Crabtree...are/will be prob. great, but if he busts with a stud contributor with his lack of FA/trades, then we may go 6-10 again, as our "core" is about what it is...average, and not getting much better. Who then, is our stud (out of nowhere potential Pro-Bowler) from out last couple of years picks? Humor Snake, but the talent is not there..JH might be pretty good, but anyone else? This is the whole point, we need to get a stud-need pick this year, else we may go 1-5 under TT and miss the 2009 playoffs. Great teams draft studs. We don't do that.

TT has only been involved with 4 drafts not 5. 5 drafts ago the Steelers hit on Rothlesberger and Max Starks while the Mike Sherman directed Packers added such talent Carrol, Joey Thomas, Donnell Washington. That has skewed the results. Since TT has been in charge here is the comparison:

Packers	Steelers
IMPACT	
Greg Jennings	LaMarr Woodley
Aaron Rodgers	Santonio Holmes
Nick Collins	   Heath Miller
	
	
STARTERS	
Daryn Colledge	Willie Colon
A.J. Hawk	        Chris Kemoeatu
Johnny Jolly	Charles Davis
Jason Spitz	
Korey Hall	
Brady Poppinga	
Mason Crosby	
	
ON TEAM 	
Josh Sitton	              Lawrence Timmons
Jordy Nelson	      Rashard Mendenhall
Desmond Bishop	      Limas Sweed
Brandon Jackson	      William Gay
James Jones	       Trai Essex
Justin Harrell	       Tony Hills
Jeremy Thompson	Bryant McFadden
Jermichael Finley  	Bruce Davis
DeShawn Wynn	        Matt Spaeth
Tony Moll	                Dennis Dixon
Will Blackmon	
Matt Flynn	
Mike Montgomery	
Patrick Lee	
Breno Giacomini	
Brian Brohm	
Allen Barbre	
Aaron Rouse	
Brett Swain	
	
GONE	
Abdul Hodge	        Noah Herron
William Whitticker 	Anthony Smith
Michael Hawkins	        Willie Reid
Tyrone Culver	         Shaun Nua
Marviel Underwood	Ryan Mundy
Kurt Campbell	Ryan McBean
Junius Coston	Rian Wallace
Ingle Martin	Orien Harris
David Clowney	Omar Jacobs
Dave Tollefson	Mike Humpal
Craig Bragg	Marvin Philip
Cory Rodgers	Fred Gibson
Clark Harris	Daniel Sepulveda
Terrence Murphy	Dallas Baker
         	        Cedric Humes
                	Cameron Stephenson

Maybe I am a bit of a homer, but I like our drafts better.

Things to consider:

Packers should have more starters because they are less deep than the Steelers

Very subjective in determining who constitutes an 'impact' player

I think several of the Packer ON TEAM column will be starters soon and some of the STARTERS could become IMPACT this season.

Packers have had higher draft position than the Steelers and should do better.

True, and Snake is not really disagreeing with it as it is all subjective. Yet, I fail to see where we are adding these elite players via the draft. Yes, we added Pickett and Woodson, etc. via FA, but the article was just talking draft, as most teams will add a top-notch FA here or there over 5 years. I have no probs with laying low in FA at all, but the Pack is the slowest team to acquire players by any means OTHER than the draft, thus, that is where we must get those beast-type players esp. considering the slow offseasons of the past 2 seasons.

When you rarely augment your roster via trades/FA as TT has done the last 2 years, the infusion of talent hinges on the draft. When you are getting pretty decent players, that is not enough to leapfrong into contender status when so many other teams hit these studs a little more frequently (AP in Minnesota for ex. who produced immediately), make a major trade (Cutler to the Bears), or use FA (Vikes' Hutchinson OG) for example. We are then limited to get exponentially better as the draft takes a few years to develop (not to say lower round picks can't be studs, but is unlikely year 1 which we need now coming off 6-10). That's why I'm advocating going for a need pick this year (as maybe an OT's ceiling may not be as high as say Oropoko, Curry, Wells, or Crabtree) but they will offer more of a contribution to winning in 2009 which we need most likely.

[Fritz]

Don't forget, too, that TT's first wave of players are coming up for contract as well as the likes of Kampman. Why blow wads of cash on the Chris Cantys of the world when you've got to re-sign Jennings & Co.?

The next two years will tell the tale of Ted's tenure.

Say that three times, fast.

[sharpe1027]

Double post.

[sharpe1027]

When you rarely augment your roster via trades/FA as TT has done the last 2 years, the infusion of talent hinges on the draft.

When you are good at augmenting your roster via trades/FA as the Packers have done the last 4 years, the infusion of talent does not hinge only on the draft.

My point for the Snake is still, do you have any kind of support for your statement other than the perception out there? Granted, I am pretty sure you will find teams that are more active, but I am also pretty sure you will find many teams that are less active. IMHO, the Packers have have had success in free agency and trades as well some failures, but the failures did not come with large cap hits.

I don't know, maybe they havee been much less active than the average NFL team with their free agency and trades. I still haven't seen a good analysis to support that perception.

[SnakeLH2006]

When you rarely augment your roster via trades/FA as TT has done the last 2 years, the infusion of talent hinges on the draft.

When you are good at augmenting your roster via trades/FA as the Packers have done the last 4 years, the infusion of talent does not hinge only on the draft.

My point for the Snake is still, do you have any kind of support for your statement other than the perception out there? Granted, I am pretty sure you will find teams that are more active, but I am also pretty sure you will find many teams that are less active. IMHO, the Packers have have had success in free agency and trades as well some failures, but the failures did not come with large cap hits.

I don't know, maybe they havee been much less active than the average NFL team with their free agency and trades. I still haven't seen a good analysis to support that perception.

Sharpe, you kind of answered you own question. Growing within is fine, but it is a slow growth..Snake's not glorifying trades/FA so much as the draft is the meal ticket (which is fine) under TT. Just stressing he really needs to get a guy who'll make a difference year 1 through the draft in 2009. I abhor FA and like resigning our guys, as most do, just saying 1 out of 49 picks over that time frame have become studs (Jennings and Arod is close) but at 6-10 all the eggs are in 1 basket, and he needs to strike oil, not only for the future, but for 2009 for us to get MUCH better and become the elite contender we all hope the Pack will be.

[sharpe1027]

Sharpe, you kind of answered you own question. Growing within is fine, but it is a slow growth..Snake's not glorifying trades/FA so much as the draft is the meal ticket (which is fine) under TT. Just stressing he really needs to get a guy who'll make a difference year 1 through the draft in 2009. I abhor FA and like resigning our guys, as most do, just saying 1 out of 49 picks over that time frame have become studs (Jennings and Arod is close) but at 6-10 all the eggs are in 1 basket, and he needs to strike oil, not only for the future, but for 2009 for us to get MUCH better and become the elite contender we all hope the Pack will be.

I think I am not getting my point across. I contend that the Packers ARE active in free agency and trades, just that people have unrealistic ideas on what most other teams do.

That being said, I also disagree that he has to get a guy that will make a difference this year in the draft. First of all, other than Favre (not to be discounted), the team is largely the same as the 13-3 team. As badly as the defense played for the second half of the year, I think the coordinator change can only improve the team.

Second, I think it is more likely, and just as productive, if some of the guys already on the roster step up and fills that role. I think there are some good possibilities (Finely, Nelson, Sitton, T. Will, J. Thompson, Harrell, Barbre, Bigby, B. Jackson ect...). So I am not buying that they must have an immediate stud from this years the draft.

[Gunakor]

Just stressing he really needs to get a guy who'll make a difference year 1 through the draft in 2009.

Snake,

Why does TT have to get a rookie that will make an impact right away? Why isn't it okay for him to draft a rookie and further develop him so that he'll be an impact player in a year or two?

at 6-10 all the eggs are in 1 basket, and he needs to strike oil, not only for the future, but for 2009 for us to get MUCH better and become the elite contender we all hope the Pack will be.

Yet you put all of our eggs in one basket when saying we need to draft an immediate starter who will make this huge impact as a rookie in 2009. There is nothing wrong with TT drafting a raw talent with huge upside that he can develop into an impact player in a year or two. Because if we win a Super Bowl in 2011 with the #9 pick in the 2009 draft contributing to that victory/season, how could you bust TT's balls for that #9 pick not being an impact player in 2009?

I mean, from that perspective, does it matter when a guy becomes an impact player? No, only that he DOES become an impact player. Suppose AJ Hawk or, god help me for mentioning the name, Justin Harrell become impact players this season - even if the #9 pick does not. We win the division and host a playoff game partly as a result of Hawk and Harrell's significant contributions. Is TT still a horrible GM for not drafting players who make an immediate impact?

I guess I personally would give him credit for finding good football players in the draft, and then give credit to the coaching staff for developing them into great football players in the NFL. Even if it didn't happen right away.

This is another of those scenarios where I have to remind everyone that the upcoming season is not the very last one the NFL will play. Please, don't put all of our eggs in one basket.

[SnakeLH2006]

Sharpe and Gunakor, I agree with both of you. But Snake feels that mediocrity and just getting to the playoffs in 2009 is kind of failure considering we were so close the SB 2 years ago.

Does Snake think TT is a bad GM? No, and far from it. But for once it would be nice to get an impact player to produce right away. Woodson was the last one to do just that years ago and that was FA. That's fine. But to take the next step, as it's proven with FA, et al, that it's very possible to go from 6-10 to Super Bowl. Look at Arizona. Yet, we might have that this year if ALL the chips fall into place. That would be quite excellent. But if it all goes to shit the point of the topic was to say if we go 4-12 with no one excelling in 2009, TT's days are numbered. I don't wish to see that at all, but let's get that need pick instead of waiting 2 years for Crabby or Wells to take that step.

If TT"s picks them, sobeit...Snake is Packer fan first and foremost, and will support the pick, but really those OT's were bad last year, so getting one of them or a top notch NT would really help us much more this year and may turn out to be just as good if not better anyway than the hyped BPA, as that has not worked out for Ted thus far at all. Bottom Line: Let's just win and we all are happy.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Then again, this just came from another topic, so what's up with this?

There have been plenty of impressive rookie starters at LB over the years. But if they really want to draft a guy at #9 that could come in and be an effective starter right away, any of the top 4 OT's would likely win the RT starting job as a rookie. But I honestly don't think our starting LB's are that bad. Certainly not bad enough to warrant a #9 pick to replace one of them out of necessity.

Isn't this what Snake has been saying? Why battle it, we seem to agree. No??

[wist43]

FYI, yes, you guys are "homers"... would rather have the Packers roster than the Steelers???

Rose colored glasses doesn't begin to describe that level of delusion... The Steelers just won a Superbowl - remember the Superbowl??? Remember 13 years ago??? 13 years AND COUNTING!!!! I say and counting, b/c no way do we win it in 2009.

Granted the Steelers have better offensive and defensive systems in place, and they do a much better job of scouting and filling specific roles, but that speaks to the point of TT's misleading this team into mediocrity - I wanted TT to adopt the Steeler philosophies when he was hired, instead he went ZBS, and passive defense.

Now, here we are 4 years later, and we've scraped the passive D, that side of the ball is completely poplulated with inadequate 4-3 personnel, the OL is still a flaming mess, and you guys would rather have the Packers roster than the Steelers???

Yes, you guys are homers, lol

[Fritz]

Fritz has decided to start collecting the names of all ye non-believers, oh Wist (you, Red, Packnut, for three starters) and when the day of judgement comes, when the Pack goes 10-6 or 11-5 or 12-4 this year and goes to the playoffs, then will Fritz be tempted to smote thee with thine own words of doubt.

But Fritz will refrain. For the mighty Fritz, who knows all and tells none, is prepared for thy inevitable response, ye doubters - that this will be "luck," that they weren't that good....Yes, Fritz knows. Thus, Fritz will bide his time, and after the 2010 season, when the Packers are established Super Bowl contenders, then Fritz will unveil the flaming Sword of Justice and Retribution, and ye unbelieivers, ye shall fall upon thy knees, humbled in sackcloth and drenched in playoff appearances.

[SnakeLH2006]

Fritz has decided to start collecting the names of all ye non-believers, oh Wist (you, Red, Packnut, for three starters) and when the day of judgement comes, when the Pack goes 10-6 or 11-5 or 12-4 this year and goes to the playoffs, then will Fritz be tempted to smote thee with thine own words of doubt.

But Fritz will refrain. For the mighty Fritz, who knows all and tells none, is prepared for thy inevitable response, ye doubters - that this will be "luck," that they weren't that good....Yes, Fritz knows. Thus, Fritz will bide his time, and after the 2010 season, when the Packers are established Super Bowl contenders, then Fritz will unveil the flaming Sword of Justice and Retribution, and ye unbelieivers, ye shall fall upon thy knees, humbled in sackcloth and drenched in playoff appearances.

Very eloquent Fritzy (like the new 3rd person do ya?..it's fun, no?...lol)...ss Snakey wouldn't be surprised if we became SB contenders, but the playoffs are first and foremost. Do it TT.

Seems like a lot of changes this year on D, esp., but maybe the players we have can do it, but to think that when we went 13-3 recently, it was a big boon to be relatively injury free for the most part. Yes, we easily make the 2009 playoffs, Snake would think, if we stay injury free again, but alas, we do need some upgrades to perpetually be contenders, or in the right now, make the 2009 playoffs. Those injuries sucked, but, regardless, our rooks have had average upside in the past few TT drafts, so it seems (maybe I'm wrong) but a couple of top picks this year to augment some future Pro-Bowlisming (new word) would really help us for once. Yes, we need to grow within as the past few years under TT, trades and FA have been limited, but so to have been his drafts...Pretty average, nothing to write home about, though.

Ye whom doleth playoff justice forth, thou hast Fritzy shalt invoke 3rd person to be spared the future wrath of draft day's suffering of perpectually being stamped in playoff lacketh toil....

That's fun stuff.

[sharpe1027]

Sharpe and Gunakor, I agree with both of you. But Snake feels that mediocrity and just getting to the playoffs in 2009 is kind of failure considering we were so close the SB 2 years ago.

Does Snake think TT is a bad GM? No, and far from it. But for once it would be nice to get an impact player to produce right away. Woodson was the last one to do just that years ago and that was FA. That's fine. But to take the next step, as it's proven with FA, et al, that it's very possible to go from 6-10 to Super Bowl. Look at Arizona. Yet, we might have that this year if ALL the chips fall into place. That would be quite excellent. But if it all goes to shit the point of the topic was to say if we go 4-12 with no one excelling in 2009, TT's days are numbered. I don't wish to see that at all, but let's get that need pick instead of waiting 2 years for Crabby or Wells to take that step.

If TT"s picks them, sobeit...Snake is Packer fan first and foremost, and will support the pick, but really those OT's were bad last year, so getting one of them or a top notch NT would really help us much more this year and may turn out to be just as good if not better anyway than the hyped BPA, as that has not worked out for Ted thus far at all. Bottom Line: Let's just win and we all are happy.

The discussion, for me, was whether or not an immediate stud (near probowl level?) player was needed from this year's draft. I disagree with the premise that this level of player must be found in this year's draft because of a perceived lack of activity in free agency and trades. Obviously it would be nice to have one.

[SnakeLH2006]

Sharpe and Gunakor, I agree with both of you. But Snake feels that mediocrity and just getting to the playoffs in 2009 is kind of failure considering we were so close the SB 2 years ago.

Does Snake think TT is a bad GM? No, and far from it. But for once it would be nice to get an impact player to produce right away. Woodson was the last one to do just that years ago and that was FA. That's fine. But to take the next step, as it's proven with FA, et al, that it's very possible to go from 6-10 to Super Bowl. Look at Arizona. Yet, we might have that this year if ALL the chips fall into place. That would be quite excellent. But if it all goes to shit the point of the topic was to say if we go 4-12 with no one excelling in 2009, TT's days are numbered. I don't wish to see that at all, but let's get that need pick instead of waiting 2 years for Crabby or Wells to take that step.

If TT"s picks them, sobeit...Snake is Packer fan first and foremost, and will support the pick, but really those OT's were bad last year, so getting one of them or a top notch NT would really help us much more this year and may turn out to be just as good if not better anyway than the hyped BPA, as that has not worked out for Ted thus far at all. Bottom Line: Let's just win and we all are happy.

The discussion, for me, was whether or not an immediate stud (near probowl level?) player was needed from this year's draft. I disagree with the premise that this level of player must be found in this year's draft because of a perceived lack of activity in free agency and trades. Obviously it would be nice to have one.

I agree to a point Sharpe, but then again, we'll have to stay injury free for us to go 10-6. Possible? Yes. But I don't see many young guys stepping up this year from the previous drafts to elevate us if injuries happen (most likely will occur), thus my stance for an impact rookie for once.

I've been mellowing over the last week about it though, and Snake would be happy for a stud (whether it's over 1-3 years)..Just would be nice for once to get that stud in year 1...if not, and if injuries occur again, it looks like TT might miss the playoffs for the 4th time in 5 years (thus, back to topic, if we tank again....this may be it for Big Time Ted).