TTT Q and A..SERIOUSLY........some funny stuff in here

[packrulz]

When you put together your 53-man roster, you were OK with Colledge backing up an aging Clifton, who hadn't started all 16 games since 2007.....



I guess you could say that about 85% of the players in the NFL. Reporters for newspapers are getting worse by the day.

Colledge was a flop at LT this year, Lang is improving, but I still expect TT to draft an OT high this year, he's got to know Clifton/Taucher are nearing the end of their careers, we need to protect ARod.

[Bossman641]

Well said Vince. And the thing is that McGinn did the same exact thing when he interviewed him earlier in the year. I don't understand what their goal is. Like you said, if they really wanted to try and get any answers of value they would try to connect with him on a personal level first and give TT some credit rather than just start attacking from the get go.

The only really good TT article I've read was the ESPN one from a few months back. Pretty sad that the local guys haven't even come close to matching that.

[Fritz]

But Ted strikes back, and hard:

"(chuckling) I'm not going to talk about that. But I would never talk about anything like that about one of our players. I'm a little insulted you'd ask."

I think Vince has explained it in a way that makes sense and rings true. Is there anywhere in that interview in which Bedard makes reference to the team's success?

For example, I'd like to know how the Packers plan to build upon their success next year. Could Thompson have been asked what areas of the team he feels are strong? If he named two or three positions, wouldn't that tell us also which areas he feels less confident in?

Does the organization see Lang as more capable at tackle or guard?

Based strictly upon the interview, you'd think the Packers went 4-12 this year. And no, I don't want fluff - but I don't want a fruitless exercise in bashing Thompson to....what, prove a point? What point?

[KYPack]

OK, maybe I got a little carried away at the end there.

Hey, don't be so hard on yourself. I agree with you 100%. It would help if one of the papers would get a clever young writer who had an in-depth understanding of the innards of football. McGinn and Bedard don't have that kind of expertise. McGinn didn't know the difference between an over and an under front in the 4-3. He could've asked a ND type guy to get the answer before he made a goof of himself, but these guys don't want to do that level of work.

Bedard can write pretty well at times, but has a flimsy grasp of the game, espec at the pro level. It shows. a lot.

He should have tosses in a couple questions about "PAD LEVEL", just to show he's one of the boys.

[SkinBasket]

I think this made my day:

Q. You didn't think you could find some sort of veteran who could do better than Colledge?

A. Obviously not.

This is where I agree with those who think Bedard should spell his name with a R and a T:

Q. Who are the young guys that you think can play left tackle?

A. We think T.J. can.

Q. You do?

A. Yeah. And we'll see. He's got some growing to do. Several of our guys have done it. And, like I said, that wasn't the end-all, be-all.

"You do?" is his follow up? There's a quick mind sharp as a tack.

[pbmax]

When you put together your 53-man roster, you were OK with Colledge backing up an aging Clifton, who hadn't started all 16 games since 2007.....



I guess you could say that about 85% of the players in the NFL. Reporters for newspapers are getting worse by the day.

That is a perfect question. Because its specific and relevant. T2 can choose to answer or not. But its begging to be asked and someone needs to ask it. Now if he chooses not to answer, then by all means dig for sources, look at his history, talk to coaches, see if anyone was surprised Colledge struggled so much, but you need to start by asking the source.

[Smidgeon]

OK, maybe I got a little carried away at the end there.

Hey, don't be so hard on yourself. I agree with you 100%. It would help if one of the papers would get a clever young writer who had an in-depth understanding of the innards of football. McGinn and Bedard don't have that kind of expertise. McGinn didn't know the difference between an over and an under front in the 4-3. He could've asked a ND type guy to get the answer before he made a goof of himself, but these guys don't want to do that level of work.

Bedard can write pretty well at times, but has a flimsy grasp of the game, espec at the pro level. It shows. a lot.

He should have tosses in a couple questions about "PAD LEVEL", just to show he's one of the boys.

I don't know the difference (except what I've seen in Madden). Care to explain it so I can expand my football schematic knowledge?

[pbmax]

I love how at the end of the season this guy has all the answers as to what went wrong. Was there a single question by that guy as to things that went well on the season?

I'd be surprised if that guy ever gets another interview.

If Bedard’s goal was to get Thompson to clam up, dig his heels in, and offer completely worthless responses, then I’d say he succeeded with his strategy to jump right in, throw objectivity out the window, ask nothing but offensive and insulting questions and presume to know more about managing a football team than the guy he is interviewing who is paid handsomely to actually do it and has been pretty successful at it overall, particularly at this point in time.

I would be more upset by a GM who is fooled by this approach than by one who has trouble drafting guards. This is the approach of the sycophant, and if the GM has any brains and an agenda, the only time information will be granted to such an approach is if it serves his own purposes. If the reporter involved is unethical, then it becomes Chris Havel repeating whatever he is told by the subject to guarantee future access.

Bedard's mistakes are in his follow up questions, instead of asking about veterans who were not added before the beginning of the season, he should be asking whether Colledge's performance will change how he judges the team's depth at left tackle going forward. That way, if Thompson leaves a similar hole next year, you have a point of comparison from the horse's mouth.

[swede]

This is where I agree with those who think Bedard should spell his name with a R and a T:

That took me a few seconds. I was looking for something deeper, and then it hit me after I anagrammed it out a bit.

Were you the chief inventor of unfortunate nicknames for your fellow 7th graders?

[Smidgeon]

This is where I agree with those who think Bedard should spell his name with a R and a T:

That took me a few seconds. I was looking for something deeper, and then it hit me after I anagrammed it out a bit.

Were you the chief inventor of unfortunate nicknames for your fellow 7th graders?

Ah, the dream job.

[ND72]

I seriously do not like Greg Benard. "Why did you put Pat Lee on injured reserve"..."He was injured"...THANK YOU. "Do you have any regrets in your tenure so far?".....do you seriously think he's gonna answer that? And then he writes a horse shit story based off of the questions. Just stupid. Can't stand the guy. he still doesn't like Ted Thompson, and he still is sour he traded Favre.

[swede]

I use to get frustrated over TTT's saying nothing at all.....now I expect it and find it funny how he jerks guys around in these

I thought the same thing while reading the interview. TT's cordial stonewalling would be maddening if it weren't a little bit funny.

Other than the last negative shot I didn't find Bedard's questions to be too unfair. Most questions were framed around negative issues, but I thought McGinn was less fair than Bedard.

[bobblehead]

I seriously do not like Greg Benard. "Why did you put Pat Lee on injured reserve"..."He was injured"...THANK YOU. "Do you have any regrets in your tenure so far?".....do you seriously think he's gonna answer that? And then he writes a horse shit story based off of the questions. Just stupid. Can't stand the guy. he still doesn't like Ted Thompson, and he still is sour he traded Favre.

You must not read bedard much. He supported TT pretty much every step of the way regarding Brent. He actually gives TT credit for building a young and talented team quite often.

The pat lee Q was relevant, many thought he shouldn't have DLed him for the year because he could have been ready by week 6? or so. He DLed him for a roster spot and so he could keep him around and give him another off season to improve.

Was it a great interview....no, but I think many are over reacting.

[ND72]

i must read him wrong then, cause I usually sense he comes after Thompson. i generally don't like him by default though.

[vince]

Was it a great interview....no, but I think many are over reacting.

I'm not sure you can overreact to this one. The fact that TT unsuccessfully tried to hold back laughter at a number of his questions, has to explicitly mention he was insulted that Bedard would repeatedly ask him to comment publicly about individual contract negotiations after stating he wasn't going to, and appears to have gotten up and walked out in the middle of the interview says about all that needs to be said about this interviewer's ability and/or agenda.

All he would have had to do was be somewhat balanced in his questioning and show just a modicum of respect to the obvious sensitivity of publicly discussing individual financial negotiations and asking TT to assassinate the character or ability of specific individuals on the team. Obviously, commenting on that is not in the best interests of anyone, and that's about all Bedard asked him to do the whole interview.

Sitting one-on-one with the GM is a big opportunity for the reporter - and the public by extention. Bedard almost completely wasted it at least in terms of learning anything relevant or interesting about the man and the team.