It is hard for me to see how this team will ever get to another SB with this regime

[Striker]

Thompson:

10 years
3 NFCCGs
1 SB win
1 SB appearance
7-6 playoff record

Wolf:

10 years
3 NFCCG
1 SB win
2 SB appearances
10-6 playoff record

Well, I was talking in regards to GMs in general that Wolf was hardly GOAT worthy.

Though Travis Williams does show that he's not even the GOAT for the Packers.

He's a great GM. But GOAT is a stretch. Just like Brett. Definitely top tier, but not enough championships compared to some of the other greats out there.

Though Thompson's record isn't too shabby. Especially considering with how much fluctuation there is in the NFL right now. And when it comes down to it, Thompson's teams were a colossal QB fuck up and a series of improbable events away from two more SB berths. And, despite how bad/worn out you may think TT is - the Packers under his leadership have won the exact same number of championships as they have under Wolf.

[Striker]

Thank you for the first legit reply to my thoughts.

Well, there were others. They just weren't patting you on the back for it.

[Maxie the Taxi]

What the hell is a damn "GOAT?"

You youngsters ain't talkin' English anymore?

[Striker]

What the hell is a damn "GOAT?"

You youngsters ain't talkin' English anymore?

Greatest of all time.

[George Cumby]

Coldplay is the GOAT.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Greatest of all time.

Oh, I get it. Thank you. Kind of like bad means good nowadays and phat means slim.

Did you guys know that Elvis is still alive?

[Patler]

Solid post

I agree with most of what you note about TTT

You make some good points on MM but I don't agree with you on Dom. Why was the D so bad then ? See your notes on Ted Thompson

Thank you for the first legit reply to my thoughts.

So a legit post is only one that agrees with you? Isn't that all Bretsky said in his reply, that he agreed with you? Not a knock on Bretsky, he is a solid poster here, but what did he really say in that particular reply? Nothing.

[Maxie the Taxi]

So a legit post is only one that agrees with you? Isn't that all Bretsky said in his reply, that he agreed with you? Not a knock on Bretsky, he is a solid poster here, but what did he really say in that particular reply? Nothing.

In your post you literally said nothing.

[Carolina_Packer]

What the hell is a damn "GOAT?"

You youngsters ain't talkin' English anymore?

Greatest Of All Time

[Patler]

It astounds me that after 11 years people still bring up Matt O'Dwyer, as if that was a great FA failure. That is exactly the type of signing you should want to see more of. It happened not to work, but that is a risk with any draft pick or FA signing. The Packers needed two guards, because Sherman had left the cupboard completely bare. TT signed a guy (O'Dwyer) who had 100+ starts in the NFL, hoping to get another year out of him. As I recall, he signed for next to nothing, but the Packers couldn't afford much as they had to release Sharper just to get under the salary cap. TT signed another, fairly expensive FA to play guard, drafted a guard and drafted another considered a C/G who ended up as a guard. O'Dwyer was virtually a no risk signing, with the possibility of being a one-year answer at guard. It didn't work, but so what?

Players don't want to play in GB now? Story is that Peppers drove up to GB and contacted no on else, just signed with GB. Williams, House, Jones wanted badly to stay. Daniels could have gone elsewhere, perhaps even for more $, but clearly wanted to stay.

The Packers have four starters who were signed as FAs. How is that ignoring the FA market?

In 2014, GB had the #1 scoring offense. Their QB was MVP and widely considered the best in the league. The had a RB with two years over a thousand yards and a solid backup, both with decent YPC averages. They had two WRs who set records as a combination and had rookie WRs drafted in the 2nd, 5th and 7th rounds, each possessing different traits. Their O-line was reasonably young and established at their positions. Yet, you seem to think MM and TT should have made wholesale changes last off season because of what happened this year. Really?

You can pick just about any position and make an argument that he should have invested more top picks in that position when a need existed. However, when the need exists, the supply might not be available. Instead, let's look at the distribution of draft picks in TT's 11 drafts:

1st& 2nd Rounds
QB - 2
RB - 2
WR - 5
TE - 0
T - 2
G -1
C - 0
DE - 3
DT - 2
LB - 3
CB - 4
S - 2

In the third rounds he has added a RB, 2 WR, 2 TE, a G/C, DE, LB and 2 S.

What position has he ignored?

In the 4th rounds he has drafted: RB, WR, 2 T, 2 G, C, DE, DT, 3 LB, 2 CB, 2 S. Except for QB and TE, he has covered every position in the fourth round alone.

He didn't plan for the departures of Collins or Finley. Both should be starting yet today.

While any year is relevant, a GM can really be judged only over time. I don't see any significant differences in the performances of Wolf and Thompson.

[beveaux1]

It astounds me that after 11 years people still bring up Matt O'Dwyer, as if that was a great FA failure. That is exactly the type of signing you should want to see more of. It happened not to work, but that is a risk with any draft pick or FA signing. The Packers needed two guards, because Sherman had left the cupboard completely bare. TT signed a guy (O'Dwyer) who had 100+ starts in the NFL, hoping to get another year out of him. As I recall, he signed for next to nothing, but the Packers couldn't afford much as they had to release Sharper just to get under the salary cap. TT signed another, fairly expensive FA to play guard, drafted a guard and drafted another considered a C/G who ended up as a guard. O'Dwyer was virtually a no risk signing, with the possibility of being a one-year answer at guard. It didn't work, but so what?

Players don't want to play in GB now? Story is that Peppers drove up to GB and contacted no on else, just signed with GB. Williams, House, Jones wanted badly to stay. Daniels could have gone elsewhere, perhaps even for more $, but clearly wanted to stay.

The Packers have four starters who were signed as FAs. How is that ignoring the FA market?

In 2014, GB had the #1 scoring offense. Their QB was MVP and widely considered the best in the league. The had a RB with two years over a thousand yards and a solid backup, both with decent YPC averages. They had two WRs who set records as a combination and had rookie WRs drafted in the 2nd, 5th and 7th rounds, each possessing different traits. Their O-line was reasonably young and established at their positions. Yet, you seem to think MM and TT should have made wholesale changes last off season because of what happened this year. Really?

You can pick just about any position and make an argument that he should have invested more top picks in that position when a need existed. However, when the need exists, the supply might not be available. Instead, let's look at the distribution of draft picks in TT's 11 drafts:

1st& 2nd Rounds
QB - 2
RB - 2
WR - 5
TE - 0
T - 2
G -1
C - 0
DE - 3
DT - 2
LB - 3
CB - 4
S - 2

In the third rounds he has added a RB, 2 WR, 2 TE, a G/C, DE, LB and 2 S.

What position has he ignored?

In the 4th rounds he has drafted: RB, WR, 2 T, 2 G, C, DE, DT, 3 LB, 2 CB, 2 S. Except for QB and TE, he has covered every position in the fourth round alone.

He didn't plan for the departures of Collins or Finley. Both should be starting yet today.

While any year is relevant, a GM can really be judged only over time. I don't see any significant differences in the performances of Wolf and Thompson.

Amen.

[beveaux1]

Now that is being Patlerized!!

[Striker]

It astounds me that after 11 years people still bring up Matt O'Dwyer, as if that was a great FA failure. That is exactly the type of signing you should want to see more of. It happened not to work, but that is a risk with any draft pick or FA signing. The Packers needed two guards, because Sherman had left the cupboard completely bare. TT signed a guy (O'Dwyer) who had 100+ starts in the NFL, hoping to get another year out of him. As I recall, he signed for next to nothing, but the Packers couldn't afford much as they had to release Sharper just to get under the salary cap. TT signed another, fairly expensive FA to play guard, drafted a guard and drafted another considered a C/G who ended up as a guard. O'Dwyer was virtually a no risk signing, with the possibility of being a one-year answer at guard. It didn't work, but so what?

Players don't want to play in GB now? Story is that Peppers drove up to GB and contacted no on else, just signed with GB. Williams, House, Jones wanted badly to stay. Daniels could have gone elsewhere, perhaps even for more $, but clearly wanted to stay.

The Packers have four starters who were signed as FAs. How is that ignoring the FA market?

In 2014, GB had the #1 scoring offense. Their QB was MVP and widely considered the best in the league. The had a RB with two years over a thousand yards and a solid backup, both with decent YPC averages. They had two WRs who set records as a combination and had rookie WRs drafted in the 2nd, 5th and 7th rounds, each possessing different traits. Their O-line was reasonably young and established at their positions. Yet, you seem to think MM and TT should have made wholesale changes last off season because of what happened this year. Really?

You can pick just about any position and make an argument that he should have invested more top picks in that position when a need existed. However, when the need exists, the supply might not be available. Instead, let's look at the distribution of draft picks in TT's 11 drafts:

1st& 2nd Rounds
QB - 2
RB - 2
WR - 5
TE - 0
T - 2
G -1
C - 0
DE - 3
DT - 2
LB - 3
CB - 4
S - 2

In the third rounds he has added a RB, 2 WR, 2 TE, a G/C, DE, LB and 2 S.

What position has he ignored?

In the 4th rounds he has drafted: RB, WR, 2 T, 2 G, C, DE, DT, 3 LB, 2 CB, 2 S. Except for QB and TE, he has covered every position in the fourth round alone.

He didn't plan for the departures of Collins or Finley. Both should be starting yet today.

While any year is relevant, a GM can really be judged only over time. I don't see any significant differences in the performances of Wolf and Thompson.

[pbmax]

Was it Retail Guy who insisted that Thompson ignored the O line and loved to bring up O'Dwyer and Klemm?

Then (after Spitz and Colledge) it was that Thomspon should have invested more higher picks. After Sitton it was more and even higher picks and no one would find a top Guard or Tackle in Round 4. Bulaga might have ended it but I think Joe stole RG's soul by then in a dream sequence.

I get the desire for a FA splash, but these draft critiques usually are pretty weak and suffer from hindsight.

[dsilby]

Thompson:

10 years
3 NFCCGs
1 SB win
1 SB appearance
7-6 playoff record

Wolf:

10 years
3 NFCCG
1 SB win
2 SB appearances
10-6 playoff record

If the only real difference is that Ron had 1 more SB appearance.
How can last season be the fault of Ted? He put together a team that took the teams worst collapse and one of the worst collapses in NFL history in the final 3 mins to not make the Super Bowl.
Ted put together a Super Bowl caliber team last season, the collapse was not his fault.
Ron Wolf was fantastic, and should be applauded. But at the end of the day, it's about Super Bowls and Ron has 1.