Gil Brandt's comments on Ted Thompson

[cheesner]

Your scale seems to be moving depending on who you're measuring. Vince Young certainly isn't being held to the same standards.

I disagree. Nowhere did I say that Vince Young is a blue chipper or a top 3-4 qb. He isn't yet. I, emphasis on I, think that he will be. So far, he has shown as knack for the big play. He can hydrate himself with as much coffee as he'd like because he is a closer. One cannot like the mental issues that he's had, but I, again an emphasis on I, suspect he'll get over them and go on to have a very good NFL career.

He's not a blue chipper yet. I think he will be in time. I don't think Rodgers will be because he's not as athletic, as fast, or as big. Young will need to throw the ball significantly better if he wants to get to that level.

If I'm picking a team to win today, I'd probably pick Rodgers over Young for one game. If we're playing twenty times, I'd probably pick Young over Rodgers. If I'm playing 200 times over 10 years, I'm definitely picking Young.

WOW!

You would take a guy with emotional problems, who can't beat out an old journey man QB while in his 4th season, vrs a guy who in his first year starting was #6 in passer rating and #4 in yards and by all accounts and perceptions, is a great team leader? And when you consider it was only his first year, this kid is very good now - and I think will be great very soon. Not sure if I put him in the top 5 just yet, but he is damn close.

Vince Young over AR? That is the worst football opinion I think I have ever read here. I think this must be class 101, 'Franchise QBs' at the Matt Millen school of team building.

[Brandon494]

Your scale seems to be moving depending on who you're measuring. Vince Young certainly isn't being held to the same standards.

I disagree. Nowhere did I say that Vince Young is a blue chipper or a top 3-4 qb. He isn't yet. I, emphasis on I, think that he will be. So far, he has shown as knack for the big play. He can hydrate himself with as much coffee as he'd like because he is a closer. One cannot like the mental issues that he's had, but I, again an emphasis on I, suspect he'll get over them and go on to have a very good NFL career.

He's not a blue chipper yet. I think he will be in time. I don't think Rodgers will be because he's not as athletic, as fast, or as big. Young will need to throw the ball significantly better if he wants to get to that level.

If I'm picking a team to win today, I'd probably pick Rodgers over Young for one game. If we're playing twenty times, I'd probably pick Young over Rodgers. If I'm playing 200 times over 10 years, I'm definitely picking Young.

Mr. Partial, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[/img]

[Fritz]

Your scale seems to be moving depending on who you're measuring. Vince Young certainly isn't being held to the same standards.

I disagree. Nowhere did I say that Vince Young is a blue chipper or a top 3-4 qb. He isn't yet. I, emphasis on I, think that he will be. So far, he has shown as knack for the big play. He can hydrate himself with as much coffee as he'd like because he is a closer. One cannot like the mental issues that he's had, but I, again an emphasis on I, suspect he'll get over them and go on to have a very good NFL career.

He's not a blue chipper yet. I think he will be in time. I don't think Rodgers will be because he's not as athletic, as fast, or as big. Young will need to throw the ball significantly better if he wants to get to that level.

If I'm picking a team to win today, I'd probably pick Rodgers over Young for one game. If we're playing twenty times, I'd probably pick Young over Rodgers. If I'm playing 200 times over 10 years, I'm definitely picking Young.

WOW!

You would take a guy with emotional problems, who can't beat out an old journey man QB while in his 4th season, vrs a guy who in his first year starting was #6 in passer rating and #4 in yards and by all accounts and perceptions, is a great team leader? And when you consider it was only his first year, this kid is very good now - and I think will be great very soon. Not sure if I put him in the top 5 just yet, but he is damn close.

Vince Young over AR? That is the worst football opinion I think I have ever read here. I think this must be class 101, 'Franchise QBs' at the Matt Millen school of team building.

He's got Al Davis doing a seminar in room 101 on wide receivers.

[Partial]

Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson and their Super Bowl rings say needing a a top guy at QB, especially to get to the SB, is BS.

Again, why is everything an absolute with you? Sure, it can be done, but history shows it's not nearly as likely. Take this post I made about a month back of recent super bowl winners.

1993 - HOF QB
1994 - HOF QB
1995 - HOF QB
1996 - HOF QB
1997 - HOF QB
1998 - HOF QB
1999 - HOF QB
2000 - HOF QB
2001 - Not HOF QB
2002 - HOF QB
2003 - Not HOF QB
2004 - HOF QB
2005 - HOF QB
2006 - HOF QB
2007 - HOF QB
2008 - Not HOF QB
2009 - HOF QB

3/17, or 17% of the time in the past 17 years has a guy not bound for the HOF won a super bowl. The teams that didn't all had legendary defenses and dominating pass rush.

If the Packers had a dominant defense and running game like the Giants did, I could see A-Rod getting them to a super bowl, sure. If they don't though, no way, and that sort of defense is pretty gosh darn rare.

Pretty tough to dispute those statistics. I'll take my chances with the stud QB

Pretty telling numbers if I do say so myself.

To the rest of you: I hope you're going to be big enough people to eat all the crow you're throwing at me for having a differing opinion. Rodgers has made it through one season. We'll see how he does in another. Luckily for him, I think GJ will resign here and as a result he'll have a bonafide superstar to throw to (think Moss) and that will greatly help his numbers.

Javon Walker had one really good year, too, remember Lets certainly hope ARod doesn't catch a string of injuries like JWalk, but really, all it takes is one to get on that slippery slope.

[RashanGary]

I believe good QB's that are on great teams for long periods of time end up in the HOF.

I don't believe great teams win the SB over and over because they have a great QB.



A great team that can continually sustain a top tier roster and has a stable QB situation is key. It just so happens that those good QB's that end up in great situations end up in a lot of big games and are in position to succeed so they become HOFers.

Chicken or the egg.


The one thing that is the same with 100% of these teams is that they are all great teams that are peaking in the post season. I'll take the great team peaking in the playoffs every time over the Favre led Packers or the Marino led dolphins.

[swede]

Mr. Partial, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[/img]

That shiv in the poop chute deserves its own word.

I'm thinking, "ShweepshaBAM!"

[sharpe1027]

Pretty telling numbers if I do say so myself.

To the rest of you: I hope you're going to be big enough people to eat all the crow you're throwing at me for having a differing opinion. Rodgers has made it through one season. We'll see how he does in another. Luckily for him, I think GJ will resign here and as a result he'll have a bonafide superstar to throw to (think Moss) and that will greatly help his numbers.

Javon Walker had one really good year, too, remember Lets certainly hope ARod doesn't catch a string of injuries like JWalk, but really, all it takes is one to get on that slippery slope.

I don't understand your point. So Rodgers isn't 100% guranteed. Big deal. There are more positive signs than negative signs at this point. Favre looked worse than Rodgers in his first year and he had one of the best wide receivers in the league.

What are you suggesting? Ditch Rodgers? For what? Frankly, you might end up being right after it is all said and done, but I really don't give a damn because your presonal assessment should have zero bearing on what the Packers should do.

[Partial]

I would suggest that they actively look to improve that spot whenever they have a chance, just like every other position on the team. I'd definitely adopt the Wolfe philosophy of drafting a QB annually.

[sharpe1027]

I would suggest that they actively look to improve that spot whenever they have a chance, just like every other position on the team. I'd definitely adopt the Wolfe philosophy of drafting a QB annually.

Way to state the obvious. If only you had just said that instead of trying to prove some abritrary definition of "elitness/blue chippyness".....

[The Shadow]

Re: Gil Brandt's comments on Ted Thompson

Eric, Bucks County 12:10 PM ET
If you owned a franchise who would you name as general manager and head coach? Who would you want as your quarterback? Gil Brandt, NFL.com

Gil Brandt:
Hi Eric. Well, I probably would want Bill Belichick as my head coach. I think I would want Ted Thompson of Green Bay as my general manager, and Peyton Manning as my quarterback.

gil brandt is one of the most respected, knowledgeable former personnel guys in the league.

i hope the packers fanbase realizes what we have in ole teddy.

Ted Thompson is building a team that can -finally- compete for a championship, year after year. I wouldn't trade him for any other GM in the league.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson and their Super Bowl rings say needing a a top guy at QB, especially to get to the SB, is BS.

Again, why is everything an absolute with you? Sure, it can be done, but history shows it's not nearly as likely. Take this post I made about a month back of recent super bowl winners.

1993 - HOF QB
1994 - HOF QB
1995 - HOF QB
1996 - HOF QB
1997 - HOF QB
1998 - HOF QB
1999 - HOF QB
2000 - HOF QB
2001 - Not HOF QB
2002 - HOF QB
2003 - Not HOF QB
2004 - HOF QB
2005 - HOF QB
2006 - HOF QB
2007 - HOF QB
2008 - Not HOF QB
2009 - HOF QB

3/17, or 17% of the time in the past 17 years has a guy not bound for the HOF won a super bowl. The teams that didn't all had legendary defenses and dominating pass rush.

If the Packers had a dominant defense and running game like the Giants did, I could see A-Rod getting them to a super bowl, sure. If they don't though, no way, and that sort of defense is pretty gosh darn rare.

Pretty tough to dispute those statistics. I'll take my chances with the stud QB

It is tough to dispute those statistics..especially when you make them up as you go along.

2009: Big Ben....mighty big assumption that he is a HOF QB.

2000: HOF? LOL There are numerous writers (and they count since they vote) who have said Warner isn't a HOF.

And how convenient of you to start with 93, wouldn't want to go back 2 years to include Hoss or Ryp.

More to the point...those numbers mean NOTHING. The game changed when they changed free agency.

[Partial]

Big Ben - I'd say 2 SB rings in 5 years, 3 championships games is pretty much a lock to go in. He has a good coach and a good young team around him. I would think his team will be back in contention again in the next 8 years or so. Another championship game and he's in imo.

Warner - Some reporters say he isn't. Sure. I'd believe it. A heck of a lot more then "some" say he is without a doubt in. MVP, 2x superbowl winner, 3x appearance. He's as much of a lock imo as Favre.

[ThunderDan]

I don't think thats an accurate assessment at all. One would have a very difficult time ranking Rodgers as a blue chipper. Jennings is without a doubt a blue chipper. Best player on the team by far.

No, only you, who has a Anti-Rodgers agfenda, would have a hard time ranking Rodgersas a blue chipper. Every one else in football disagrees with you.

Anti-Rodgers agenda? Hardly. I think he's a fine, above average quarterback. I don't understand why so many people seem to think there are 20 superstar QBs in the NFL. Rodgers is no where near Manning, Brady, Rivers, Brees, McNabb, Roethlisberger... I don't even think Rivers/Roethlisberger/Brees are necessary blue chippers.

Blue chip is a star. A bondafide top 3-4 player at their position in the league. I highly, highly, highly doubt that most people who watch football think Rodgers is a top 3-4 QB. Can you provide some sort of source stating otherwise?

As I have stated countless times, I'm a believer in that unless you have a top 3-4 guy at QB, you keep searching. It's too important of a position to settle for only the top 33%.

I'm not saying Rodgers is like Rex Grossman (I think he's significantly better), but lets not forget that Rodgers has played one season, had a dynamite supporting cast, and ended up with a 6-10 record. Rex led the league in games with a QB rating over 100 in 2005, was a borderline pro bowler (like Rodgers), but he took a team to the super bowl. I'm not saying we can expect Rodgers to fall off like Grossman, but it's foolish to put the buggy in front of the horses if you know what I mean. So far, he hasn't proven much, and speculating on him being spectacular seems... premature.

If an average QB can throw for 4,000+ yards, why couldn't Favre the HOF QB throw for 5,000+ with the same offensive strategy?

Why don't you give Rodgers a break?

[sharpe1027]

Big Ben - I'd say 2 SB rings in 5 years, 3 championships games is pretty much a lock to go in. He has a good coach and a good young team around him. I would think his team will be back in contention again in the next 8 years or so. Another championship game and he's in imo.

Warner - Some reporters say he isn't. Sure. I'd believe it. A heck of a lot more then "some" say he is without a doubt in. MVP, 2x superbowl winner, 3x appearance. He's as much of a lock imo as Favre.

By your own definition of what justifies acceptance to the HoF you have rendered your entire argument circular. Congratulations.

[Partial]

If an average QB can throw for 4,000+ yards, why couldn't Favre the HOF QB throw for 5,000+ with the same offensive strategy?

Why don't you give Rodgers a break?

Who cares how many yards he threw for? Don't you agree their is a finite amount of yards one can throw for?