When Brett Favre gets hit, blame Thompson

[b bulldog]

You can blame TT for the young line but remember that bein g hit alot doesn't mean you need to throw 30 picks, David Carr!

[woodbuck27]

..........

Geez Woody, I thought you were going to recommend we storm HQ with ultimatums for TT.

TT has a completely different philosophy than Sherman had. Sherman was all "win now with Favre." I wonder if Sherman would have changed that philosophy after Favre retired and would have started building from the ground up like TT?

That being said, TT could have placed a priority on protecting Favre - but he didn't. I have no problem believing that he has a philosophy and is sticking to it - I think he expected his plan to sufficiently protect Favre, but it's not working yet (some bad luck is involved of course, with injuries). With TT's philosophy, you have to have the long view on things and perhaps Favre will take a beating in the short term. But here's the thing - Favre is not TT's guy. A-rod is. No matter how much TT likes Favre, he blew a #1 pick on A-rod, and he's going to see him start. I wouldn't be surprised if TT is secretly hoping Favre leaves sooner than later, because TT likes his guys and I bet he doesn't like Favre's gunslinger mentality and, if the Packers continue to lose for the next year or so, he certainly won't like Favre's "chuck it up, it doesn't matter" philosophy.

Bottom line: I suspect that TT and Favre essentially have "philosophical differences" and that Favre's end in GB will not be happy as a result.

I certainly respect your honest forthrightness mraynrand.

Ted Thompson is trying to kill Brett Favre.

Now can we discuss the suggestion you make at the top of your post, mmmmm.

Sincerely.I hate what may well happen to OUR Vets.Green and Favre mraynrand. It doesn't seem possible that they've been placed in harms way.

It sucks !! It really bothers me to worry about these GREAT Packers.

DAM !!!!!!

[4and12to12and4]

Very good post, Vince. Your points seem valid, and believable. If anyone here thinks that having Wahle here last Saturday would've somehow changed our blocking woes need to go to a book store and find some good reading on Football 101. It has been stated, restated, and restated that EVRYONE blocking Saturday FAILED. Not just the guards, hell, not especially the guards. Could TT have kept Wahle? Possibly. Would it have meant a whole hell of a lot last week. Ask Tauscher and Clifton. And Bubba. And Henderson. And Wells. And Davenport. And ...

[4and12to12and4]

Packers: Moll's the key to Plan B
Written by Bob McGinn - Milwaukee Journal Sentinal
Friday, 18 August 2006

Green Bay - Tony Moll's performance in this exhibition game and perhaps the next won't define his career. It could, however, go a long way toward defining the Green Bay Packers' season.

If Moll fails as the latest candidate to replace Marco Rivera at right guard, general manager Ted Thompson will be just about out of options. Thompson abhors trading his precious draft choices. Still, he might have to deal for a veteran guard in order to head off what has the potential to be sustained weakness in the middle of the offensive line.


"I don't think we're desperate," the 22-year-old Moll said Thursday. "Other guys can easily do it, too. Will Whitticker. Daryn (Colledge). Jason Spitz."Thompson thought that, too, when he elected not to bring back either Mike Wahle or Rivera after the 2004 season. Many have been tried at guard in the last 12 months (Adrian Klemm, Whitticker, Scott Wells, Grey Ruegamer, Matt O'Dwyer, Atlas Herrion, Spitz, Colledge and Junius Coston), and everyone except Spitz has failed.

Moll, the fifth-round draft choice from Nevada, has been one of the more pleasant surprises of training camp. Nevertheless, his performance is far better than his perspective. Finding competent guards has been anything but easy for the Packers.

Under Thompson, the Packers keep trying to wish their way into a solution at guard. One collegiate tackle, Colledge, couldn't make the transition to left guard and was benched Monday in favor of Moll, another collegiate tackle who appears more gung-ho but no more capable, at least on paper. Spitz now starts at left guard after having been the right guard.

"It's the second game of my career and my second season of playing offensive line," Moll said. "The chance to be starting at right guard for the Green Bay Packers, it's unbelievable."

Coach Mike McCarthy doesn't want a repeat of last year, when the Packers didn't settle on a pair of starting guards until Sept. 5, six days before the opener. Undoubtedly his preference would be for the Spitz-Moll pairing to click so well Saturday night against Atlanta that it would remain intact entering the regular season.

"Maybe that's the best rotation right now," Thompson said. "Maybe that changes in 10 weeks. Maybe it changes next year. We're just trying to get the best combination for now."

Moll, a live wire from Reno, Nev., comes across as anything but awe-struck about his startling change in fortune.

"I'm going to have as much fun as I can and try to kick some butt," he said. "I'm relentless, one thing that sold these coaches to draft me. I'm not a cheap-shot thing but I'm going to be looking for those extra punches when guys are backing off. I'm going to get on my toes and go after them. I'm not going to give them that extra chance to take an extra breath."
The chances of Moll and Spitz, but particularly Moll, lining up against the murderer's row of defensive tackles inhabiting the NFC North and providing effective play at guard would seem slim.

Just before the start of training camp, offensive coordinator Jeff Jagodzinski declared that Moll "was a tackle all the way. It will be awhile for him to get on the field. That's OK."

Joe Philbin, who coaches the offensive line, also had high hopes for Moll but said there were absolutely no plans to try him at guard.

Moll was a tight end and defensive end in high school and a tight end during his first four years at Nevada. Moved to weak-side tackle in January 2005, he ate and lifted until his weight shot up from 250 to 300 pounds in eight months.

Expecting to enter the league as a free agent, Moll is convinced that the Packers drafted him because Sammy Seale, their West Coast scout, once told him how much his play intrigued him.

"It's a big deal," Moll said. "I'd love to have this position and keep the starting job. I will try my hardest trying to keep it."

But if he doesn't succeed, Moll brims with confidence based on his three-week performance at right tackle.

"For some reason, if I'm not able to do it, I'm not going to let it affect me," he said. "Because I know I can play tackle. I have such a bright future here."

Moll left Green Bay in June weighing 308 but has trimmed down to about 295. Under the tutelage of strength coach Rock Gullickson, Moll says he has "drastically" improved his strength. He bench-pressed 225 pounds a meager 18 times last winter; he estimated his reps now would be more than 25.

So far, at least, Moll appears better able to translate his strength and competitiveness to the field than Colledge. He's athletic, fit, bright-eyed and eager.

"The easy part for me was we ran the same kind of run scheme at Nevada," he said. "I came into minicamps already knowing all the rules and how to run-block. Now moving to tackle, I've had to change my stance and re-do everything."

Moll's pass protection in practice has been inconsistent, to say the least. But the staff took more than casual note when he went up a few times against multi-talented Shawne Merriman of San Diego on Saturday night and did OK.

"If I had known it was Shawne Merriman I would have been a little hesitant thinking he was going to bring some kind of move I've never seen before that's going to make me look like a little baby," Moll said. "But he wasn't able to do that."

It was a good start for Moll, enough to make him the nominal starter. With thousands of eyes watching at Lambeau Field, he'll seek to become the permanent one.

Just thought I'd post this article here. Seemed to fit.

[vince]

Thanks for that article 4&12-12&4.

As I stated earlier, I think Ted Thompson is putting the franchise on the right path, but I will also wholeheartedly agree with the detractors when they note his one (IMO) major error - not figuring out how to resign Mike Wahle. That one hurt.

[FavreChild]

I very much respect your detailed opinion, vince. I still hate TT, but I am happy for someone to change my mind. Having met the guy, I will never respect him (don't need to bash the guy, so I won't elaborate). But I sure hope he knows what he's doing and will be glad to give him his due credit *IF* that proves to be the case.

[Scott Campbell]

I guess I'm willing to blame Thompson for the play of the O-line tonight.

[the_idle_threat]

I also blame him for Greg Jennings' performance.

[woodbuck27]

Here's my take on Ted Thompson...

Ted has a vision. That vision is comprised of a goal and a number of strategies he employs to achieve the goal.

He believes his responsibility is NOT to put a "competitive" team on the field in 2006 - as you state, Woody. If you believe that's his responsibility, then it's obvious to see why you won't think he's doing a good job. Your goal for him is different than his goal for himself. The strategies a GM would use to achieve the goal of "putting the best team possible on the field this year" are different than the strategies Ted Thompson is using to achieve his goal.

Ted Thompson is working toward the vision of reestablishing the Green Bay Packers as a DYNASTY. This means that he wants to build an organization and team that will win year after year after year after year - not just in 2006.

The way Ted is going about achieving his goal is by:

1. Objectively evaluating the current state of the franchise at all times.
2. Establish and maintain the cap management to act in ways consistent with your other strategies.
3. Offenses score points. Defenses win championships.
4. Build your foundation through the draft.
5. Invest in quality free agents, preferably young ones, at the time when it makes sense (See strategy 1).

When Ted Thompson took over, I believe he saw a team that wasn't very good, with some exceptions. He saw a porous defense. He saw a great quarterback, and he saw serious cap problems. The Packers had significant dead cap space on their books, still accounting significant dollars for the likes of Joe Johnson and Cletidus Hunt. He saw an aging team that, if not for the greatness of Brett Favre, had far less talent and a far worse cap situation than in the past. This team was not a dynasty, they were a team that was eeking into the playoffs because of a weak division and Brett Favre.

In order to build a dynasty, he had to take control of the salary cap situation. And he did that.

In order to build a dynasty, he has to build a formidable defense. He's doing that. Hawk, Hodge, Collins, Pickett, Kampman, Manual, and possibly Blackmon add a rock solid foundation to the defense. A couple more young pieces to this puzzle and we're set for a decade.

In order to build a dynasy, he has to rebuild his offense. The players he drafted on offense will be strong contributors for years to come. Will they learn a lot - through making mistakes - this year? I'd bet that will be the case. But I believe Jennings, Spitz, Colledge, and maybe even Moll, will be good. I see them as very capable of growing into stalwart members of the offense for years to come.

Obviously, there are some more pieces needed on offense. For the future, I think he needs to get a stud running back, a pass-catching TE, and another stud receiver, and a shut-down Tackle. On offense, we'll see about Ahman for 2006 (I think he's still got enough left), but Ahman isn't getting any younger.

Given the current state of the franchise, going out and overpaying for free agents just doesn't make sense. If you do that, you will end up overpaying for players who are typically on their last chance to cash in with a big contract, and often only have a couple productive years left before their performance declines significantly. For what? To get the Packers from 4-12 to 8-8? Maybe even eke into the playoffs, only to get beat in the first round- and find yourself in cap hell once again?

To build a dynasty, you have to understand the state of your team, and get your targeted free agents when your FOUNDATION is together and young, and you are perhaps a team that is one or two players away from Super Bowl contention. The Packers are not there yet.

Next year at this time? Perhaps.

I see a bright future for the Packers. It just will most likely take another year for the youngsters to gain experience and for a few additional pieces to come together to see it blossom.

I happen to agree wholeheartedly with Thompson's approach. I want to see the Packers build a dynasty, rather than a team that sneaks into the playoffs, only to get blown out by the NFL's elite each year.

I hope Brett sticks around another year to help make it happen.

Vince I need time to concentrate on studying this post and Thank You. I'll respond ASAP. I just read it two minutes ago and it's now after Midnight in Montreal.

We had a wonderful win tonight. It was a WILD game . It was a preseason game as well, but thank goodness we didn't stink the house out in this one.

Tough week on the forum. Good tough.

Funny this talk.

" Ahhhh "the Falcons" threw it."

I don't think so.

GO PACKERS ! FAITH IN 2006 !!

[woodbuck27]

Thanks for that article 4&12-12&4.

As I stated earlier, I think Ted Thompson is putting the franchise on the right path, but I will also wholeheartedly agree with the detractors when they note his one (IMO) major error - not figuring out how to resign Mike Wahle. That one hurt.

OK I dug in and read your post again Vince.

It comes down to - patience Vs impatience.

It comes down to - painting the house or siding the house.

We can study theory models like my:

SOLID OL = Effective if capable QB + Enabled RB

Till the cows come in, and work off that theory - that it all falls in if the OL is weak.

Weak OL = WEAK TEAM = Bad record = High Draft Pick

In the NFL weak OL = weakening "O" = gradualy weakened "D" due to Time Clock Imbalance.

WE can be concerned as to weak OL = injuries to QB and/or RB.That brings up depth on the team by position questions.

In my needs to protect the likes of Favre and Green - as I'm just an insignificant emotional fan, all wrappped up in my emotional fan reaction. I forget nor I really care about 3-5 years from now.

I'm the Brat fan and I must be the RAT fan.

I want Favre and Green to go out on top and happy with the team they have contributed so much to.

I'm an idealist and they (Favre and Green) are not now / not ever and therefore expendable now or in the near future any way it transpires.

Injury or retirement "it don't matter to Ted" reminds me of that song. . . " it don't matter to me" So if they, either/or fall to serious injury. So what . For Favre it's serious money in the bank - TED's BANK. Green is now relatively cheap as he's sort of a re-tread anyway - RIGHT TED ??

JAYSUS !!!!!

Favre and Green are not a part of the future plan to win, and win and WIN !!!Win a Super Bowl. So Favre and Green do not = Super Bowl, because it's not in the PLAN.

What plan?

Ted's PLAN, and if you want to win now, then don't try to discover Ted's PLAN.

I do see your theory Vince. I think.

Ted Thompson is working off the . . . get more players with real talents, that can be developed in time, and plug the holes but BUILD on YOUTH, and LOWER Cost FA's, and only trade when the player available - can impact tomorrow probably, not necessarily today.

Fans that want to win must suffer through any number of seasons of head scratching BS, to reap the Final Glory as presented by TED !!

It's a cruel World that Ted Thompson spins.

TED's TERRIBLE TIDY WORLD.

TED's WORLD. Cruel for the Vet's.

They merely play now - play and buy time for the talented youth to hone their skill set, based on a pediction of their upside.

I guess to like it. One has to mentally accept it. Smarten up and set any emotion aside.

NOT A PROBLEM. . . .

GO PACKERS ! FAITH FOR OUR FUTURE !!!

Waaaaaaaiiiittt !!

Nawwww! ! I want it all, or most of it for Favre and Green and "the Vet's. I'm not going to get it all but for one thing. . . "in faith".

I believe the EVIL TED's WORLD can be fooled by GREATNESS and LEADERSHIP.

I certainly don't want Favre ending his career with a serious injury. The OL better do great in school, otherwise don't screw around.

GET A TUDOR.

I'm the REBEL - "the Outlaw Rat".

I'm anti-establishment. I want to have fun every day, not save and save up, for a huge party once every 6 months with people you hardly ever see in between.

My name is Ed.

[Tarlam!]

"In all, Favre completed 16 of 22 passes for 134 yards and two touchdowns. His passer rating was 118.4."



'Nuff SAID!

[woodbuck27]

"In all, Favre completed 16 of 22 passes for 134 yards and two touchdowns. His passer rating was 118.4."

'Nuff SAID!

Yup. Good night for the team. WILD !!

PACKERS ! FAITH !!

[Tarlam!]

'buck, there's this really neat concept that a lot of humans subscribe to as being incredibly valuable. I wanted to share it with you, 'cause, even though you are the most "experienced" fan posting, you clearly have never heard of it!

'buck, there's this great thing called SLEEP. Go google that term.

[vince]

Woody said:

Favre and Green are not a part of the future plan to win, and win and WIN !!!Win a Super Bowl. So Favre and Green do not = Super Bowl, because it's not in the PLAN.

Unfortunately, this past offseason, IMO, the Packers were at a point where there are/were just too many holes and question marks on both sides of the football to go out and overpay for free agents. It would be potentially foolish to think they could make a serious run at a Championship - in 2006... Would one or two of the free agent signings this past season made them better? Undoubtedly, but there's a good time to take risks with big contracts, and there's a bad time to take risks with big contracts.

Fortunately, because we didn't go out and overspend this past offseason, next year, we'll be in an equally good cap situation, and we can see how the team gels this year and determine if we're in position to make a SERIOUS RUN AT A TITLE potentially from a position of strength, rather than weakness - as we were this past offseason.

I think Favre could be a significant part of the plan, if he can keep himself in great shape physically. IMO, he's very close to being as good as he's ever been. It's just a question of supporting cast...

I'm not so sure about Ahman, just because of the physical punishment that runners of his style and caliber take over the years, and because his game is a speed game, and his legs simply aren't getting any younger. At a minimum, I think we need to start (after this year) phasing Ahman into more of a situational role and look hard for a stud that transition into being the man for years to come. In looking at next year's free agent lists, I think that guy is going to have to come from the draft...

Woody, I don't think that the Packers are far off... Sure, they could be 6-10 this year, but recent NFL history is LITTERED with stories of teams that (seemingly) came out of "nowhere" to win Championships. I really believe that 2007 will be the year of "rebirth."

For this year, I am very excited about the progress that we can make. My attitude is to watch the games, of course passionately pull for the Pack, and see how the team comes together.

The "conventional wisdom" says this team isn't very good. Obviously, there will be a number of new contributors this year, and with that will come mistakes and growing pains, but I see a vastly better team this year than last on both sides of the football. I see a team that appears to be better coached, at least offensively, and I see some playmakers on the defense.

I'm going to revel in the growth and "surprises" that this year will bring, and look boldly toward the future. That's just where we're at right now.

[vince]

Woody said:

Fans that want to win must suffer through any number of seasons of head scratching BS, to reap the Final Glory as presented by TED !!

It's a cruel World that Ted Thompson spins.

TED's TERRIBLE TIDY WORLD.

TED's WORLD. Cruel for the Vet's.

TED's WORLD is cruel for the vets - ONLY WHEN THE TEAM ISN"T VERY GOOD.

Next year, we may sign some people and go to the promised land. We'll certainly have the cap space to do it - if it makes sense...


Woody said:

It comes down to - patience Vs impatience.

The way I see it, that's close, but I think it's SLIGHTLY different. I think it comes down to short-term vs. long-term, and being objective about your current situation.

A short-term orientation will inevitably lead to long-term pain. But THAT COULD BE OK, under the right circumstances. If you are on the cusp of competing for a championship, take a short-term orientation and make decisions that will benefit you now (but probably hurt later).