TT Confidence Meter

[Smidgeon]

With these definitions on what makes a move luck or skill, it would seem that the only moves that involve skill is when you pay a high price for a player. So we'll give credit to TT for Clay Matthews but all other moves were luck, good or bad?

Apparently that's the way it goes. No accountability. Except when you want to get rid of somebody...

[Scott Campbell]

With these definitions on what makes a move luck or skill, it would seem that the only moves that involve skill is when you pay a high price for a player. So we'll give credit to TT for Clay Matthews but all other moves were luck, good or bad?

Apparently that's the way it goes. No accountability. Except when you want to get rid of somebody...

It's a bottom line business. With no real threat to his job status during his 5 year tenure, I think its safe to say that the Executive Council is happy enough with him - up till this point in time anyway.

[sharpe1027]

I'm not sure what your complaint is with Leapers post. I think he was incredibly fair. He never mentioned Adrian Klemm, or Matt O'Dwyer, or Marquand Manuel. See, if you want to crown Ted as a "genius", then you have to categorize these moves too.

I agree. Where I come down is that either he was both luck and unlucky, or he was "genius" for several moves and "stupid" for several moves. What I do like is that even his unlucky/stupid moves haven't hamstrung the team financially for several years.

Leaper said he was "top 5" in talent acquisition, and even I'd be hard pressed to disagree. But the guy isn't perfect. Nobody is. He is, and always will be an abysmal communicator. That's part of his job. He's surely not top 5 in that department. (I recognize that some of you think that saying nothing is a "skill". I do not agree.)

Personally, I don't give two sh##s what the guy says to the media as long as it doesn't hurt the team. You can, of course, feel that talking to the media has some bearing on his job performance. That's perfectly within your right. I don't see much advantage to a sliver tongue other than making some fans feel all warm and cozy...

He said that Ted got "lucky" with Woodson. That's true. Not because he didn't know Woodson was a good player, hell even I knew that, it's because he didn't want to come here. If ANYONE else wanted Woodson, he'd be there today. In that sense, Ted got damn lucky.

The fact that he initially did not want to come to GB speaks volumes about TT's success. Look at it this way, there is a cut-throat business in which 32 teams can compete for the services of a group of FA players. The GM of a particular team performs his evaluations and then goes after a particular player, which any of the other teams can sign (and would if they thought it would help their team). This GM gets the player and he turns out to be the best of all the available players. This is, quite frankly, the opposite of luck. There really is nothing "lucky" about it. It was an open competition in which one GM was better than 31 other GMs. What is lucky about that?

He inherited Al Harris, from <gasp> Mike Sherman. Resigning him could have been accomplished with a chimpanzee leading the team.

Yet, somehow I suspect that had Al taken a downward turn due to age (as some had suggested might happen) you would be complaining about it. You can't really have it both ways. Even if it seemed a straight forward move to you, there was plenty of consideration that went into it. Hindsight is always 20/20.

Maybe a chimpanzee could have done the same. I suppose that is why Sherman got fired, he blew so much cap money that he would often not have enough money to make these kind of re-signings.

He gets credit for Williams, that's pretty clear. If you recall, he put Williams (an undrafted free agent who was waived by Houston his rookie year) on the practice squad near the end of the 2006 season, and someone on staff developed him.

Good point. Which guy in the organization is ultimately responsible for putting together the staff that included that "someone on the staff" to develop him? Shouldn't we give that guy some credit?

The whole "talent" thing is overblown in my opinion. Every single player that gets into an NFL training camp has the "talent" to succeed. Whether they have the rest of the tools to succeed is quite a different matter.

Not sure what you mean. I would generally think that "talent" includes the tools needed for success. Are you talking about physical talent vs. mental talent?

Finally, as to Rodgers, I do have to also agree with leaper. Had we drafted 15th, would we have taken him? I don't think so. Rodgers fell for a reason. People were scared of his delivery, and were also worried about Tedfords history. Rodgers only started for one season at Cal if I recall correctly, and only played on the team for two seasons having started in junior college. I don't think Ted would have been much more willing to risk a high draft pick on him than anyone else was. Lots of unknowns at that point.

If Rodgers fell for all those reasons, then doesn't TT deserve even more credit for seeing past what all those other teams couldn't?

I don't mean to be rah rah TT, and I don't mean to completely rip on your post retail. I agree that TT, and any GM, can improve. I just don't agree why you dismiss his good moves.

I think he should be judged by how well the team does on a consistent basis. I am not one of those people that think that a team has to win the SB almost every year for the GM to be successful.

IMHO, the odds of improving the team by getting rid of TT are very small. So he should stay. He's good and I like that his system seems setup to keep the Packers in contention over a long period of time. IMO, you need type of system because no matter what type of team you put together in preseason, you can never, ever guarantee a SB victory. You might as well give yourself many shots at it over many different years.

[retailguy]

I just don't agree why you dismiss his good moves.

I really didn't think I was "dismissing" his good moves. Quite honestly, I think that's the most pro-Ted post I've ever made.

It is just sickening to read that he "can do no wrong". Everything he gets "right" gets magnified and everything he does "wrong" gets minimized. I'm sure it works the opposite way if you borrow Justin Harrell's glasses.

While we're on that topic, please note that not once did I mention the player that goes by that name, nor did I mention waiving Jon Ryan either. There are several other things I could have brought up if my goal was to bash the guy. It wasn't. I was merely pointing out that he has benefited from some no brainer moves while he's been here, just like everyone else in the league. We can't give him too much credit for some moves, but he's not completely to blame on others either.

Every move the guy makes is not "money in the bank". But when it comes to personnel moves, he gets more right than he gets wrong. As leaper pointed out, there is more to the job than just personnel. I think he isn't very good at those things. Maybe he'll improve, I don't know. We all have to grow into a job.

Expounding on the Rodgers point, I agree with what you said, with one exception. As a player falls, the "price" falls too. At some point, just like a commodity on a store shelf, the player becomes "too good of a value" to pass up. I think that's what happened to Rodgers at 24. That is the best reason why I think he would not have been picked by Green Bay at 15. Others in that draft would have been a better value with less risk at 15. Rodgers became a great value at 24, notwithstanding "need". Plenty of teams pick with limited need when the value gets "good" enough. Hope that clarifies my point.

[Scott Campbell]

It is just sickening to read that he "can do no wrong".

Well that would sicken me too. Except I've never read that.

Check out the poll results. Most of this forum doesn't put him in the Top 5, including me.

I think it's fine for you to not like Ted. I get it. He rubs you wrong, and it's been that way since he hired back on. But I think you need to acknowledge that it affects the way you view his accomplishments.

And for the record, I think that his cutting of Ryan was a completely boneheaded move. I can see why they wanted to go another direction, but there was no excuse for the lousy timing. That's totally on Ted. He's also on the hook for not providing us with a decent punter, or decent return man. I'd be a lot more pissed at him over the O-line situation if he hadn't brought Tauscher back in to shore it up. That move went from being horrible to merely suspect.

[Smidgeon]

It is just sickening to read that he "can do no wrong".

Well that would sicken me too. Except I've never read that.

Check out the poll results. Most of this forum doesn't put him in the Top 5, including me.

I think it's fine for you to not like Ted. I get it. He rubs you wrong, and it's been that way since he hired back on. But I think you need to acknowledge that it affects the way you view his accomplishments.

And for the record, I think that his cutting of Ryan was a completely boneheaded move. I can see why they wanted to go another direction, but there was no excuse for the lousy timing. That's totally on Ted. He's also on the hook for not providing us with a decent punter, or decent return man. I'd be a lot more pissed at him over the O-line situation if he hadn't brought Tauscher back in to shore it up. That move went from being horrible to merely suspect.

You mean a second return man? Blackman was pretty good when healthy...

[pbmax]

Any drafter/GM is simply playing the odds. Trying to avoid known factors that cause trouble and trying to maximize those attributes that mark future success. No one knows anything for certain or Ryan Leaf, Tim Couch and Kenneth Sims would have been All-Pros.

Thompson almost certainly would not have traded up to get Rodgers at 24 since he still had Favre under contract for five years and had a rebuilding project underway. To take a QB for a team with no talent at backup QB makes sense; to spend two picks on that QB makes far less sense. And he very well may not have taken him at 15 with the other needs of the team. But neither scenario is a good test of a GM. Any GM who falls in love with specific players will be out on his ear in four years. Ask Sherman.

And ask Thompson. Hawk seems to be as close to a Thompson favorite/sure thing as we have seen. And had Thompson paid extra to get him, then the limited upside he has shown would have been even more painful to witness.

And as for using all available avenues for player acquisition, I give you Orlando Pace, Stacy Andrews and Adrian Klemm. Good luck sorting the wheat from the chaff. FA is as much a crapshoot as drafting these days as teams finally stopped boxing themselves in with the cap and could keep their best players.

And Woodson had a broken leg, not a knee injury in 2005. He may have had a knee prior to that, but his last season in Oakland ended with the break.

[Scott Campbell]

It is just sickening to read that he "can do no wrong".

Well that would sicken me too. Except I've never read that.

Check out the poll results. Most of this forum doesn't put him in the Top 5, including me.

I think it's fine for you to not like Ted. I get it. He rubs you wrong, and it's been that way since he hired back on. But I think you need to acknowledge that it affects the way you view his accomplishments.

And for the record, I think that his cutting of Ryan was a completely boneheaded move. I can see why they wanted to go another direction, but there was no excuse for the lousy timing. That's totally on Ted. He's also on the hook for not providing us with a decent punter, or decent return man. I'd be a lot more pissed at him over the O-line situation if he hadn't brought Tauscher back in to shore it up. That move went from being horrible to merely suspect.

You mean a second return man? Blackman was pretty good when healthy...

I have two problems with Blackman. He can't stay healthy, and he can't play DB worth a lick.

[Gunakor]

we need a more complete/game changing RB....

I still fail to understand why everyone is so down on Ryan Grant. The guy is a top 10 back in the NFL. That's what he is. 2 years in a row now, in a pass happy offense. Since week 9 of the 2007 season, the week Grant became the regular starter in our pass happy offense, ONLY Adrian Peterson has gained more yards rushing. But unlike Peterson, Grant doesn't fumble the ball. What does a guy have to do to earn respect around here?

What we need is Ryan Grant to do what Ryan Grant does. We need a better line in front of him. We need a better line in front of Rodgers. We need a better line, period. There is nothing wrong with any of the skill positions on offense.

I would say a better line will help him break explosive runs...that is really why he isnt considered an elite back in my opinion.

Well, that and he doesn't utilize a second move or break many tackles on the second level...

And as we all complain about that, he averaged 4.5 ypc en route to 1253 yards and 11 TD's on the season. Here's my question. Who cares about a second move or breaking tackles at the second level when he's getting the yards, moving the chains, and scoring the points? I could care less about breaking tackles at the second level as long as he's consistently falling forward for 4. That leaves 3rd and 2. That moves the chains, keeps the clock running, and wears out the defense. I'll take that all afternoon, every Sunday in Autumn.

We run a form of ZBS. Lets get our zone blockers out on the second level guys and throw a block so Grant doesn't have to break so many goddamn tackles. That'd help too.

[Gunakor]

He's also on the hook for not providing us with a decent punter, or decent return man.

Ted has provided us with an exceptional return man. Blackmon just can't stay healthy anymore. Tramon Williams has proven more than adequate returning punts as well, but hasn't been asked to do it very often recently with his increased playing time on defense.

A better punter would be nice, though. Preferably, however, I'd rather our offense get the ball to at least midfield on most of their possessions so that we don't need the strongest legged punter in the NFL.

[Scott Campbell]

Ted has provided us with an exceptional return man. Blackmon just can't stay healthy anymore.

As opposed to when?

He's slightly more durable the Justin Harrell. The only decent return man on the team is Woodson, and that just isn't going to happen.

[pbmax]

What I would really like to know is if the same evaluation process led Thompson to trade up for Matthews and Jeremy Thompson. Matthews was a need, I would like to know what it was about Thompson. My gut tells me Waldo would tell us it was measurables, but in each case why trade up?

It would be an interesting insight that we probably won't get to hear until Thompson retires.

[Smidgeon]

we need a more complete/game changing RB....

I still fail to understand why everyone is so down on Ryan Grant. The guy is a top 10 back in the NFL. That's what he is. 2 years in a row now, in a pass happy offense. Since week 9 of the 2007 season, the week Grant became the regular starter in our pass happy offense, ONLY Adrian Peterson has gained more yards rushing. But unlike Peterson, Grant doesn't fumble the ball. What does a guy have to do to earn respect around here?

What we need is Ryan Grant to do what Ryan Grant does. We need a better line in front of him. We need a better line in front of Rodgers. We need a better line, period. There is nothing wrong with any of the skill positions on offense.

I would say a better line will help him break explosive runs...that is really why he isnt considered an elite back in my opinion.

Well, that and he doesn't utilize a second move or break many tackles on the second level...

And as we all complain about that, he averaged 4.5 ypc en route to 1253 yards and 11 TD's on the season. Here's my question. Who cares about a second move or breaking tackles at the second level when he's getting the yards, moving the chains, and scoring the points? I could care less about breaking tackles at the second level as long as he's consistently falling forward for 4. That leaves 3rd and 2. That moves the chains, keeps the clock running, and wears out the defense. I'll take that all afternoon, every Sunday in Autumn.

We run a form of ZBS. Lets get our zone blockers out on the second level guys and throw a block so Grant doesn't have to break so many goddamn tackles. That'd help too.

I was only commenting on why he isn't considered elite. He doesn't create. That's why he's not considered elite.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Gunakor, will you marry me?

[sharpe1027]

I really didn't think I was "dismissing" his good moves. Quite honestly, I think that's the most pro-Ted post I've ever made.

Fine, calling his good moves "lucky". I don't really want to get into semantics. My main point was that calling good moves luck seems to be a biased view.

It is just sickening to read that he "can do no wrong". Everything he gets "right" gets magnified and everything he does "wrong" gets minimized. I'm sure it works the opposite way if you borrow Justin Harrell's glasses.

You say you are being misrepresented regarding "dismissed" and then do the same right back to me. Nobody is saying he "can do no wrong."

While we're on that topic, please note that not once did I mention the player that goes by that name, nor did I mention waiving Jon Ryan either. There are several other things I could have brought up if my goal was to bash the guy. It wasn't. I was merely pointing out that he has benefited from some no brainer moves while he's been here, just like everyone else in the league. We can't give him too much credit for some moves, but he's not completely to blame on others either.

No, what you did is call his good moves "lucky" or something a "chimpanzee" could do. When you brought up some of his bad moves, I generally agreed with you. I have no idea what he was thinking with John Ryan, but a have a guess he listened too much to a certain special teams coach. If that is the case I put it even more on TT, it is his job to do the evaluations of both the players and the coaches.

Every move the guy makes is not "money in the bank". But when it comes to personnel moves, he gets more right than he gets wrong. As leaper pointed out, there is more to the job than just personnel. I think he isn't very good at those things. Maybe he'll improve, I don't know. We all have to grow into a job.

I just personally don't care that he isn't able to spin stuff to the media. You do. That's fine.

Expounding on the Rodgers point, I agree with what you said, with one exception. As a player falls, the "price" falls too. At some point, just like a commodity on a store shelf, the player becomes "too good of a value" to pass up. I think that's what happened to Rodgers at 24. That is the best reason why I think he would not have been picked by Green Bay at 15. Others in that draft would have been a better value with less risk at 15. Rodgers became a great value at 24, notwithstanding "need". Plenty of teams pick with limited need when the value gets "good" enough. Hope that clarifies my point.

Yeah, that makes sense, but I don't really see the point of that hypothetical. IMHO, it was a damn good pick regardless. If I use that logic, I could just as easily argue that TT was unlucky with Harrell. If TT was drafting at a higher position he probably would have drafted someone else...so I hope you can see why I don't really take a lot of stock in that type of analysis.