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

[Packnut]

Thompson

The Teddy debate is a mute point for now. The truth is there is more evidence and fact to support the negatives than the positives. By his own admission in today's article about the late rounds and how good he should be at uncovering gems, his track record leaves much to be desired.

I think the biggest reason for Packer fans disagreement over Teddy comes from his philosophy and that is where I have my biggest problem with him. Ted Thompson is a PASSIVE GM. Even his most ardent supporters have to agree with that.

Above all else, the man tries to play it safe. His drafts wreaks of average players. He does'nt take chances on FA's because that is an area that can kill a team if you guess wrong. It's a shame he is that way because Woodson and Pickett have to rank very high in the Packer history of great FA moves. Hell, I'd put Woodson in the top 3 of best ever, may-be even higher.

In any event, I think most agree this is a critical draft for Thompson and his future. Average will no longer get it done. He has to hit on at least 1 blue chip player and a couple of good guys. I sure hope he get's it right. We are in a division with GM's who will roll the dice and a bad draft here will have us spending the next few years looking up at the Vikes and Bears, a position that will truly SUCK!

It would be nice to someday go back to x's and o's and stop ripping each other over the value of Mr Thompson..........

[Zool]

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

[sharpe1027]

Re: Thompson

The Teddy debate is a mute point for now. The truth is there is more evidence and fact to support the negatives than the positives. By his own admission in today's article about the late rounds and how good he should be at uncovering gems, his track record leaves much to be desired.

I think the biggest reason for Packer fans disagreement over Teddy comes from his philosophy and that is where I have my biggest problem with him. Ted Thompson is a PASSIVE GM. Even his most ardent supporters have to agree with that.

Above all else, the man tries to play it safe. His drafts wreaks of average players. He does'nt take chances on FA's because that is an area that can kill a team if you guess wrong. It's a shame he is that way because Woodson and Pickett have to rank very high in the Packer history of great FA moves. Hell, I'd put Woodson in the top 3 of best ever, may-be even higher.

In any event, I think most agree this is a critical draft for Thompson and his future. Average will no longer get it done. He has to hit on at least 1 blue chip player and a couple of good guys. I sure hope he get's it right. We are in a division with GM's who will roll the dice and a bad draft here will have us spending the next few years looking up at the Vikes and Bears, a position that will truly SUCK!

It would be nice to someday go back to x's and o's and stop ripping each other over the value of Mr Thompson..........

For fucks sake get your arguments straight.

One of the biggest critisms of TT has been that he tooking a risk on an injury prone DT in the first round, at the same time he is blasted for being too safe in his picks. You take risks you get burned. Pick a side.

The other biggest critism is "lack of activity in free agency". Not a single person, not one, has bothered to compare the Packers activity in free agency over the past years to that of other teams. I call bull shit.

[K-town]

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

It's a MOO point. It's what cows think. Noone cares what a cow thinks.

[ThunderDan]

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

Maybe it is mute and we should all say nothing about it from now on.

[ThunderDan]

Isn't that the truth.
Drink the kool-aid and think the way we do or you will be dismissed.
Hate Favre, Sherman sucked, TT is the savior....

Way to lump everyone together under one blank statement.

I loved Favre playing for the Packers. I think the way he got out of Dodge was crap. Either way there aren't a lot of 17 year veteran QBs and we were damn close to Favre pulling the plug on himself. TT got Rodgers and after his first season as starter I'm pleased about his future.

Sherman traded up to get a punter and is already being "rumored" that football supporters at A&M want him gone.

As for TT, I think he took a cap strapped team with very little talent and turned it around pretty quickly. The next two years will determine if he really is the GM for the GB Packers. But comparing where we were under Sherman vs. where we are now I see no reason to pick the team from 4 years ago.

[RashanGary]

Nice post, TDan. Coming from someone who I thought was tough on Rodgers last year, I think it means a little more. I think it shows you call a spade a spade (as you see it anyway).

[Zool]

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

Maybe it is mute and we should all say nothing about it from now on.

That makes sense actually.

[cpk1994]

B/C we don't agree on philosophy doesn't make me any less a Packer fan... been rooting for the Packers since the 60's.

Thats how it works in these forums wist, lol....... if there is something in particular u dont care for about the Packers, chumps around here will call u less of a Packer fan.
Dont like Thompson? To these guys, that makes u less of a fan.
Dont think Rogers has shown anything special? Again, these guys will call u less of a fan.
Dont care for how Thompson is "building through the draft" (LMFAO!!!) Again, less of a fan.

you have about 20 more years of being a Packer fan under your belt than me Wist, and you have seen a lot worse from GM's than what I have seen.

Isn't that the truth.
Drink the kool-aid and think the way we do or you will be dismissed.
Hate Favre, Sherman sucked, TT is the savior....

When you spew midless shit like you do, of course you will be dismissed, regardless of your opinion of TT.

[Packnut]

Mute

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

No, for fucks sake, it's spelled the way I meant it! Debating Teddy would never be a moot point because it's always an on-going topic. DUH!

However, it's should be a MUTE point as in time to hit the button and all of us, (myself included) shut the fuck up (about Teddy) and let this draft develope.

[Packnut]

Mute

Its moot for fucks sake. MOOT

Maybe it is mute and we should all say nothing about it from now on.

That makes sense actually.

You did get it! My apologies, I did'nt see this one. I should have known better.........

[Lurker64]

Technically speaking, "moot" means "subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainly, and typically not admitting of a final decision."

So "Ted Thompson's quality as a General Manager" is at this point is, quite literally, a moot point.

It's just one of those words that's commonly used to mean the opposite of what it actually means, like "nonplussed" or "literally".

[sheepshead]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ifdqEmlx-I

[sharpe1027]

Technically speaking, "moot" means "subject to debate, dispute, or uncertainly, and typically not admitting of a final decision."

So "Ted Thompson's quality as a General Manager" is at this point is, quite literally, a moot point.

It's just one of those words that's commonly used to mean the opposite of what it actually means, like "nonplussed" or "literally".

My favorite: irregardless.

Moot is not exactly an opposite usage, more like a shift in meaning. According to google a moot point used to mean that a point is subject to debate (i.e., a moot point is a point that is hypothetical and therefore hard to prove). Now it is often used in the context of a point has no relevance, which might be true if the point was extremely hypothetical and impossible to prove.

Sorry for the "for fuck's sake" Packnut.

[Lurker64]

My favorite: irregardless.

I've tried to work "disirregardless" into my vocabulary, but I'm a pedant.