Tweet
Originally posted by BF4MVP
Originally posted by Patler
This article is terrible
-
I see they have now fixed this error too. As of noon, or so, "seven" was changed to "six". Heck, by the end of the day it might be a reasonably good article!hahahaha nice catch
This article is terrible -
This is a fun thread..."Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg JenningsComment
-
With all the information now available on the net, packer sites, Blogs, etc, JS has to get it's ass in gear.
I wouldn't be shocked to see Nickel or Silverstein replaced, re-assigned or something in the near future.Comment
-
Nickel should stick with the personal interest, get-to-know the player articles. She does OK with those. I have found many to be interesting and informative, even if a bit sappy. She simply makes too many errors when she tries to write factual articles about the Packers. Others do too.
The premise of this article was good, and could have been interesting if done well. But in reviewing the makeover of the roster, it has to be accurate to be credible. The article also makes too much of insignificant moves. In the chart, if the intent was to be thorough, too many players were missed. If the intent was to hit the significant players, why list all the insignificant street free agents signed in the middle of the year, most at minimum salaries? Who really cares that TT has released Jason Horton, Ben Steele or Michael Hawthorne, etc. Those kinds of players come and go on a regular basis. Sherman may have cut them too, if he were still GM. Is it really a big deal that TT did not re-sign a 40 year old FA punter (Bryan Barker), or that late round picks like Curtain were let go after a couple injury plagued years? Very few 6th and 7th round picks are still around for a third season with the team that drafted them.
The important aspect of the article is lost in the insignificant details. The fact that the drafts from 2001 to 2004 yielded only 6 players currently on the roster is huge in understanding the lack of talent in GB. A review of the makeup of a few other teams would have been very interesting. On average, how many players drafted from 2001-2004 do other teams have? I suspect it is more than the six in Green Bay.Comment
-
But, I mean, Carroll in 2001?! A 10 year old would probably know that was wrong. And here we have a grown women who is getting paid, yet she still can't get it right, even with the tools of the interenet all around her. Pathetic."I've got one word for you- Dallas, Texas, Super Bowl"- Jermichael FinleyComment
-
I think we have identified at least 11 errors in the article, including the following erroneous statements:
1. Favre drafted by Wolf.
2. Green signed as a "FA".
3. Barry "drafted".
4. Wahle a free agent loss, when he actually was released while under contract.
5. Sharper a free agent loss, when he too was released while under contract.
6. J.T. O'Sullivan acquired as a free agent.
7. R-Kal Trulock being acquired as a free agent.
8. Carrol being drafted in 2001.
... and the following ommissions that are relevant to the story:
9. No mention of the loss of Jue as a free agent.
10. No mention of the trade of Sherman pick Chris Johnson.
11. No mention of the trade of Sherman acquisition Steve Morley.
Any high school teachers out there? What grade would you give the reporter for this "research project"?Comment
-
Patler,
How could you misspell R-Kal Truluck? (R-Kal Trulock)
He is in my top ten of "most hated Packers".
God, Shermie was SUCH a terrible GM.
Can you imagine how much other GM's (real ones) were laughing behind his back?Comment
-
They might have been, KY, but for a number of years they were probably dumbfounded as well because he kept beating them..."Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg JenningsComment
-
Yeah, true....Originally posted by MJZiggyComment
-
Originally posted by lord favre
All by himself?Comment
-
According to John Madden, yes...Originally posted by Rastak
Comment
-
Originally posted by lord favreAccording to John Madden, yes...Originally posted by Rastak
Oh yea, now that you qualified it I'll agree completely......I'm sure John totally believes that.Comment
-
In all seriousness my point was a Brett favre in his prime could mask a lot of personnel mistakes and make a less talented team remain competetive.Originally posted by RastakOriginally posted by lord favreAccording to John Madden, yes...Originally posted by Rastak
Oh yea, now that you qualified it I'll agree completely......I'm sure John totally believes that.
Keep in mind I am a Bears fan and loathe Favre but am not blinded by my hatred enough not to recognize what a talent he was. As a Bucks fan I felt the same way about Jordan...
there was enough left over talent to carry Sherm a few years, not unlike Wannestedts early years with the Bears. Sherman just got a few more years out of Wolfs team because of Favres presence. Nothing will kill a team faster than poor drafting and nothing hurts a team longer than bad drafting. Even with free agency you still need to draft well, it's how you keep the salary cap manageable.
Sherman made horrible gaffs in both free agency and in the draft...I honestly cannot think of one impact player drafted by Sherms..and by impact I mean a difference maker not a serviceable pro.Comment
-
How does one become a Bear fan AND a Buck fan?
By the way, I have to give you the Madden bit. That man uses Favre's pic the way other men use porn..."Greatness is not an act... but a habit.Greatness is not an act... but a habit." -Greg JenningsComment
-
I'm a Brewer, Badger, Buck and Bear fan...must be a "B" thing?Originally posted by MJZiggy
I grew up in Racine during the 70's and 80's and loathed my step-dad watching the sorry Packers of the time getting killed. I was pretty much a Redskins fan until my Bear loving uncle got me watching Payton. I learned to love the bears as much as I loved Walter, then them winning a SB when I was 14 cemented it...much like a lot of the 20-30year old Packs fans here.Comment
Comment