Thompson Ruining Lives, Making People Miserable

[pbmax]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-gm-ted-thompson-focused-on-retaining-top-executives-b99710010z1-376867501.html

McGinn has a report that the Packers have denied interview chances for Wolf (Detroit), Gutenkist (Philadelphia, Tennessee) and Highsmith (Washington).

Bob finds a tiny amount of grumbling, alongside a declarative statement that the only two franchises without inside political games and backbiting are the Packers and the Steelers.

We also don't get an answer why these guys keep signing multi-year deals if they want to go. Bob does believe Ted when he said the new jobs and titles were about fairness and not succession because of the lack of opportunity elsewhere. Doesn't display his evidence though.

Also left unexamined is the idea that Wolf let his guys pursue other opportunities because he didn't want someone working on Lombardi Avenue who did not want to be there. We know he did let some guys leave, but did he let everyone who got an offer? (Hint: answer is no.)

And at the bottom of the article are three names who don't really help the narrative: John Schneider, John Dorsey and Reggie McKenzie.

[Patler]

They lost their top 3 guys in three years, just three years ago. You have to maintain some stability, too. Thompson will eventually let these guys go, as he builds the foundation below them. To lose the top 6 guys in a six year period could have really set the Packers back.

[mraynrand]

They lost their top 3 guys in three years, just three years ago. You have to maintain some stability, too. Thompson will eventually let these guys go, as he builds the foundation below them. To lose the top 6 guys in a six year period could have really set the Packers back.

Funny how people want the guys from an failure of an organization led by a terrible GM. Thompson must just be a powerless figurehead, and these other 6 guys just lucky to have Favre and Rodgers as spontaneously great QBs.

[Carolina_Packer]

"Chop Job" Bob is at it again. The sourcing is flimsy and has that familiar feeling of contempt towards Thompson. Why doesn't he just write an article entitled "I Don't Like Ted Thompson"?

Here is another similar article by Bob from 1/1/13 with a different tone. This time it's McCarthy and not Thompson in the cross-hairs, but he doesn't make snide remarks about McCarthy like he does in the article that PBMax shared.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packe...185390861.html

Well, Bob, how do you reconcile the two articles? They both seem to cast blame independent of one another.

[pbmax]

The only source described is close to Eliot Wolf. That might be where the grumbling is coming from.

[Carolina_Packer]

If anyone is miserable about being denied the opportunity to try for other jobs, can't they just leave when their contract is up?

[pbmax]

If anyone is miserable about being denied the opportunity to try for other jobs, can't they just leave when their contract is up?

Yes. I think McAdoo did this, so his last year here as QB coach was the last year of his deal I believe. But its not common as the chance at future employment is obviously contingent on a lot of things.

As the money in the NFL has grown and the power of the individuals increased though, its become possible for players and coaches to just insist their way to new contracts regardless of terms. Like the holdout of a star player, an unhappy coach or GM often can force adjustments.

Front office personnel don't quite have that leverage. But the idea of not wanting key workers unhappy isn't new.

Wolf subscribed to it. However, like all things Wolf, the actual events aren't quite as clean as the public recitation of his genius. Not everyone got a chance to interview for every job. If McGinn were to run the numbers, I bet Thompson's rate of losing people is just a step below Wolf. And that is why an article that makes it seem that he is against the public Wolf policy is a terrible framing of the events.

[Patler]

Yes. I think McAdoo did this, so his last year here as QB coach was the last year of his deal I believe. But its not common as the chance at future employment is obviously contingent on a lot of things.

As the money in the NFL has grown and the power of the individuals increased though, its become possible for players and coaches to just insist their way to new contracts regardless of terms. Like the holdout of a star player, an unhappy coach or GM often can force adjustments.

Front office personnel don't quite have that leverage. But the idea of not wanting key workers unhappy isn't new.

Wolf subscribed to it. However, like all things Wolf, the actual events aren't quite as clean as the public recitation of his genius. Not everyone got a chance to interview for every job. If McGinn were to run the numbers, I bet Thompson's rate of losing people is just a step below Wolf. And that is why an article that makes it seem that he is against the public Wolf policy is a terrible framing of the events.

Even if a coach or exec. doesn't sign an extension when offered, it doesn't mean that same contract won't be offered after the old one expires. Sure, he runs the risk that GB will simply look elsewhere, but if he is a good and effective coach or exec, why would GB want to? So, he plays out his option, so to speak, makes himself available for the 2 weeks or so that it takes at the end of the season to fill all of the top jobs around the league, and if he doesn't get one, he goes back to GB. If not, he can likely get a similar job on one of the new staffs. The top guys are never unemployed long, unless they want to be. Especially front office guys. Someone simply creates a position for them.

If Elliot Wolf didn't sign his extension and then didn't get one of the GM jobs, how likely is it that GB wouldn't resign him? Even if they didn't, what are the chances someone else wouldn't hire him for a spot on a new staff, or simply fabricate a position for him?

This article is ridiculous when the facts are that 3 of 31 other teams are being run by guys TT allowed to interview and leave for those jobs. All he is doing is controlling the rate at which the departures occur. I would be willing to bet that several of the ones mentioned will be allowed to interview for those types of jobs within the next few seasons, whenever TT feels he has inhouse replacements for them if they get the job and leave..

[mraynrand]

The point about fostering and maintaining consistency and cohesiveness is wise, I think. Successful organizations are necessarily going to lose people, because of the pyramidal nature of any leadership hierarchy. But you can't take out too many bricks at once, or the structure collapses. Workers moving up want to have it both ways if possible - the security of a long-term contract, and the ability to be mobile if an opportunity arises. They have to accept some consequences when they sign that deal. If they 'poison the well' trying to get out, it may actually hurt their reputation and be self-defeating. In any case, it's obvious the Packers aren't running a slave camp. 'Ol Clickbait Bob wins again.

[Patler]

There are only 32 NFL general manager positions available. Five of the current ones can trace their roots back to the Green Bay Packers. Three worked under Thompson and were allowed to leave by Thompson. If you are in the Packers front office and regularly moving up or getting expanded responsibilities, chances are as good as anywhere that eventually you will get consideration for top positions, and be allowed to pursue them.

[Guiness]

There are only 32 NFL general manager positions available. Five of the current ones can trace their roots back to the Green Bay Packers. Three worked under Thompson and were allowed to leave by Thompson. If you are in the Packers front office and regularly moving up or getting expanded responsibilities, chances are as good as anywhere that eventually you will get consideration for top positions, and be allowed to pursue them.

5? TT, the 3 mentioned in OP (John Schneider, John Dorsey and Reggie McKenzie), who'd I miss?

[pbmax]

5? TT, the 3 mentioned in OP (John Schneider, John Dorsey and Reggie McKenzie), who'd I miss?

Scott McCloughan in Washington was a Wolf scout.

[Patler]

5? TT, the 3 mentioned in OP (John Schneider, John Dorsey and Reggie McKenzie), who'd I miss?

Scot McCloughan.

[Guiness]

Scott McCloughan in Washington was a Wolf scout.

Right, the guy who was let go by the 49ers for drinking. Forgot he was in GB. He passed through Seattle after that, Schneider brought him in.