Announcement

**Tony Oday** · 10-21-2006, 03:52 PM

I would have to say I like some moves dont care about some moves and Hate some moves:

Like:
Hawk
Jennings
Collins
Pickett
Moll
Spitz(I really like this guy)
AR
Getting Green Back
Getting rid of Carrol
getting rid of Sander
Signing Manuel (sure he sucks but I liked the signing at the time so did everyone else)
Henderson
Fire Sherman
Resigning Kamp

Indifferent about
Poppigna I still think he sucks but I would LOVE to be wrong
Longwell goes Bye-Bye
Gardner here and gone
Dumping Leach
Handling of Al Harris's contract
Taylor signing

Dont Like:
Trading Gado(F YOU TT YOU OWE ME A JERSEY!)
Signing Woodson! WTF sure it added some excitement BUT WHY NOT LAW!
Not getting a decent RB to replace a broken down Green
Letting MM get Shitty as the DB coach!
Not signing a decent WR! Ponder or someone like that not a game breaker but a return guy that can fill in you know like that little guy we let go ah what was his name TT? OH yeah CHATMAN!
Letting Sherman come back at all!
Failing TWO YEARS IN A ROW to get 4 decent NFL not NFLE WR

I think he has done a decent to average Job.

So Far C+

If the future plans work out he could VAULT into an A+ or plunge to a F-.

**esoxx** · 10-21-2006, 04:02 PM

Great summation B. I echo your thoughts completely. TT needs to use all the tools at his disposal, which includes the draft, FA and trades. Heaven forbid he give up a mid to late round pick to acquire some vet OG or WR help when needed. He won't do that but will take flyers on a guy like Cory Rodgers in the draft.

The Packers have a wealth of resources at their disposal to get the job done. TT needs to step it up this next off-season and shore up things that need shorin' up.

I agree that the Packers needed rebuilding, but you don't have to take a wrecking ball approach. Forrest Gregg did that in '85 and just how did that turn out? Anyone can tear down, the hard part is building back up. Use the resources TT.

His biggest mistake so far is drafting Rodgers with his first pick. Talk about drafting for the future. With FA, this is more of a win-now league. Unless you think he's special, like a Carson Palmer, you can't afford a #1 toiling on the bench for years b/c his contract is up before you know what you have or you risk losing him. I doubt Rodgers is that type of special player.

**Bretsky** · 10-21-2006, 04:41 PM

""His biggest mistake so far is drafting Rodgers with his first pick. Talk about drafting for the future. With FA, this is more of a win-now league. Unless you think he's special, like a Carson Palmer, you can't afford a #1 toiling on the bench for years b/c his contract is up before you know what you have or you risk losing him. I doubt Rodgers is that type of special player"""

I AGREE

YOU DON'T HAVE TO DRAFT A QB; YOU CAN PICK ONE DECENT ONE UP EVERY YEAR IN THE TRANSITION.

AND FOR THOSE WHO SAY....WELL......WHO'D HE HAVE DRAFTED THAT HAD A FIRST ROUND GRADE ?

MIKE PATTERSON WOULD HAVE BEEN A SOLID DL .........THERE WERE OTHER NICE FINDS THERE AS WELL

I'M ASSUMING NOBODY WAS TOUCHING ODELL THURMAN THAT EARLY DUE TO HIS HORRID BACKGROUND

**Joemailman** · 10-21-2006, 04:46 PM

To answer your question B, I think the future becomes now in 2007. The Packers should be in a position to challenge for the playoffs next year. If that is not the case, there will be some tough questions that need answering. John Jones becomes the new President next spring. I know he was somewhat invoolved in the TT hiring, but if he does not like the direction the team is heading, he may not show the type of patience that Harlan would.

**Patler** · 10-21-2006, 05:51 PM

Re: STIRRING THE TT POT AGAIN ..."FOR THE FUTURE"

Originally posted by Bretsky

RANDOM THOUGHTS ON THIS SATURDAY

But knowing of Robinson's probable suspension before the trade deadline and then Fergy's injury, we heard little of TT's efforts to bring in a quality WR. Did he try ? I'd hope so, but I'm starting to be more of a doubter.

And is Brewster and Bookman really the best out there ? Maybe we can find the next flavor of the day after our Taco like experiment last year; but it's doubtful. An effort for Willie Ponder would have looked real nice now. Tyrone Calico anyone ?

B

If Ponder or Calico are so interesting, how come in just the last two weeks the following teams filled WR needs by doing the following:

Bengals put a WR on IR, signed Glenn Holt from their practice squad.
Texans signed David Anderson from their practice squad.
Tampa signed Chad Lucas.
Miami released a WR, signed Vick from their practice squad.
Detroit signed Devale Ellis from their practice squad.
Arizona signed Carlyle Holiday from their practice squad.
MN releasedMann and signed Bethel Johnson.
N.E. signed Jabar Gaffney.

In just two weeks covering transactions before and after the Packers signed Francies eight other teams passed on these guys, in spite of making moves involving wide receivers. You can ignore Miami's move involving Vick if you want, its hard to say what all is behind that, but that still leaves 7 others.

**Packnut** · 10-21-2006, 06:35 PM

TT

The TT supporters say all is well as long as we're improving. Well open your eyes. Let's go back to last season and look at the WR situation. It was a HUGE problem for us. Now fast forward to this season. How has it improved? We're in the same boat being short at WR. Your gonna say he drafted Jennings. Well that arguement is total BS cause he gave up Walker. I won't even argue that imo Walker is a better WR. So let's call that a draw.

The fact is that after a whole freakin year, it has'nt improved so where did TTdo such a fabulous job? How did he improve our WR corps? He did'nt, just like he did nothing to improve our RB situation. Morency can't hold onto the ball, (by the way, what was TT smoking when he trades for a RB from a team that was desperate for one)? Ya think Houston knew Morency had fumbleitis?

I would love to buy the we're improving BS but the facts say that so far, TT has not improved us in even 1 area. Our secondary gives up more yds than ever. When has ANY of our LB's made a game changing play? Hawk is all about potential. Our D line Still does'nt pressure the QB on any consistent basis. The OL seem's to be better but they were so bad at the beginning that anything look's better. The ram's run D is not exactly the lithmus test.

It's funny that the same guys who support TT here are the same ones who believe this "re-building" is normal and they accept losing very easily. What happens IF we end up with a worse record than last season? Are you still gonna tell us we're improving under TT?????????????????????????

**Patler** · 10-21-2006, 07:08 PM

My whole point is that there really is nothing out there for wide receivers to get the "quick fix" at the position that you criticize TT for not accomplishing. Everyone seems to just sign their own PS guys when the need arises. You can say, "make a trade" but in view of the rest of the roster, is now the time to make that investment? And for who? Someone else's disgruntled player? Mostly teams are willing to trade their 4th receiver, maybe their 3rd for more than he is worth, but that's all. As for TT improving nothing, I disagree.

Are you really suggesting that having Hawk, Hodge, Taylor and yes, even Poppinga from last year isn't a better group of linebackers than Thomas, Lenon, Manning, and the seemingly always injured Diggs (even though I always liked Diggs as a player)? Even if you argue they are no better right now (I would disagree), clearly there is more promise for the future.

Same for the O-line. Colledge, Spitz and Moll show clear promise for the future, and seem to be playing better even now than Klemm, Whitticker and Ruegamer and Wells as a guard last year. I would even argue that Wells is performing better at center than Flanagan last year, even if he is not to the standards of Flanagan of 4 years ago or so. Flanagan was never going to be there again either.

Losing Wahle and Walker were not good thinigs. But Flanagan and Rivera had had their run. They will decline steadily from injuries and age.

Sherman's success in won/loss record did not reflect the status of the roster. No other team in the division even had a winning record during the Sherman years. Being .500 was not all that difficult when 6 games were against the weaker teams in the league before you even looked at the non-divisional games, and you had a QB like Favre in his prime and one of the best runningbacks in the league for 5 years. If you want to really see where the Packers stood, look at their record since 2000 against teams that ended the year with winning records. I've posted it here several times. It was very poor, an indication that inspite of a lot of wins, they were not one of the better teams, merely an average one that played more than their fair share of weak teams, and a team that was aging with few quality replacements inhouse.

This was a mediocre roster in quality, and it finally came home to roost at the same time as salary cap difficulties surfaced. That's why the roster was "blown up". There was very little foundation to build on.

I will never forget TT's comment in an interview before the draft in 2005. When asked if anything surprised him in his first few months on the job, the first thing he said was that after studying all the game films from 2004, the roster was not what he expected. My take was that he thought a winning team would have a better roster than what GB had.

**SD GB fan** · 10-21-2006, 07:30 PM

i see ppl are getting impatient. heres to winning the next few games and forgetting this issue.

**The Shadow** · 10-21-2006, 08:39 PM

Personally, I like most of his moves.
I think much better days lie ahead.

**mraynrand** · 10-21-2006, 08:59 PM

Originally posted by Patler

Sherman's success in won/loss record did not reflect the status of the roster. No other team in the division even had a winning record during the Sherman years. Being .500 was not all that difficult when 6 games were against the weaker teams in the league before you even looked at the non-divisional games, and you had a QB like Favre in his prime and one of the best runningbacks in the league for 5 years. If you want to really see where the Packers stood, look at their record since 2000 against teams that ended the year with winning records. I've posted it here several times. It was very poor, an indication that inspite of a lot of wins, they were not one of the better teams, merely an average one that played more than their fair share of weak teams, and a team that was aging with few quality replacements inhouse.

This is one area I will wholeheartedly agree regarding Sherman and the transition to TT. It was obvious that after the blown 2001 draft, Sherman used draft picks (two #4s for Glenn, a #2 for Harris, a #2 for the right to move up and get Walker) and FA spending (Big$ for Johnson, KGB, moderate bucks for Green, Tauscher and Clifton) to keep the veteran squad intact/assemble a solid team for one final run with Favre. the 2002 team, which was Superbowl capable, was derailed by injuries, and the 2003 team was derailed by an inexplicable series of unfortunate events all in one game.

In any case, 2002 and 2003 were it - after that you could see the writing on the wall - the team was in rebuilding mode. How Sherman eeked out 10 wins in 2004 was amazing. The squad was depleted of players. TT wants to rebuild mainly through the draft, so it's likely this team won't be playoff solid until 2008, and that's assuming A-rod is a good to above average QB. So far, TT looks below average in pro player moves and even though the prospects for the 2005 draft look grim, it's going to be a year or two more before you know for sure.

**Partial** · 10-21-2006, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by Patler

I will never forget TT's comment in an interview before the draft in 2005. When asked if anything surprised him in his first few months on the job, the first thing he said was that after studying all the game films from 2004, the roster was not what he expected. My take was that he thought a winning team would have a better roster than what GB had.

Hmmm, now that is very, very interesting to read Patler. Maybe TT does know what he is doing after all!

**crosbiegrad** · 10-21-2006, 09:17 PM

I think that TT has tried to improve the WR problem, how could he have predicted that Murphy would have gone down in his first season?!! Sure he may have done a little more this year to improve the situation but didnt he try? We need steady improvement right now and I think Teddy has us going in the right direction

**Packnut** · 10-21-2006, 09:23 PM

Originally posted by Patler

My whole point is that there really is nothing out there for wide receivers to get the "quick fix" at the position that you criticize TT for not accomplishing. Everyone seems to just sign their own PS guys when the need arises. You can say, "make a trade" but in view of the rest of the roster, is now the time to make that investment? And for who? Someone else's disgruntled player? Mostly teams are willing to trade their 4th receiver, maybe their 3rd for more than he is worth, but that's all. As for TT improving nothing, I disagree.

Are you really suggesting that having Hawk, Hodge, Taylor and yes, even Poppinga from last year isn't a better group of linebackers than Thomas, Lenon, Manning, and the seemingly always injured Diggs (even though I always liked Diggs as a player)? Even if you argue they are no better right now (I would disagree), clearly there is more promise for the future.

Same for the O-line. Colledge, Spitz and Moll show clear promise for the future, and seem to be playing better even now than Klemm, Whitticker and Ruegamer and Wells as a guard last year. I would even argue that Wells is performing better at center than Flanagan last year, even if he is not to the standards of Flanagan of 4 years ago or so. Flanagan was never going to be there again either.

Losing Wahle and Walker were not good thinigs. But Flanagan and Rivera had had their run. They will decline steadily from injuries and age.

Sherman's success in won/loss record did not reflect the status of the roster. No other team in the division even had a winning record during the Sherman years. Being .500 was not all that difficult when 6 games were against the weaker teams in the league before you even looked at the non-divisional games, and you had a QB like Favre in his prime and one of the best runningbacks in the league for 5 years. If you want to really see where the Packers stood, look at their record since 2000 against teams that ended the year with winning records. I've posted it here several times. It was very poor, an indication that inspite of a lot of wins, they were not one of the better teams, merely an average one that played more than their fair share of weak teams, and a team that was aging with few quality replacements inhouse.

This was a mediocre roster in quality, and it finally came home to roost at the same time as salary cap difficulties surfaced. That's why the roster was "blown up". There was very little foundation to build on.

I will never forget TT's comment in an interview before the draft in 2005. When asked if anything surprised him in his first few months on the job, the first thing he said was that after studying all the game films from 2004, the roster was not what he expected. My take was that he thought a winning team would have a better roster than what GB had.

Your arguement all centers around the same theme and that is the "potential" for the future. I'm dealing with facts and the situation as it exists now and on the moves TT has made up to date. I can't argue what will happen in the future or on "potential" because we cannot see into the future. I see guys like Moll and Poppinga making mistakes but yet you hold them up as an example to the future.

As for the cap problems , we can debate that until we're blue in the face. I find it amusing that you TT guys hold onto it as some kind of defense mechanism and your best excuse for where we are today.

However you can't use that excuse when it comes to the horrible moves TT has made. How did the past cap problems have any effect on signing Woodson and Manuel just to name a few?

**FavreChild** · 10-21-2006, 09:42 PM

Great post, Bretsky.

Personally, I think TT should have been hired as a draft specialist, not a GM. I feel no need to rehash my assertions about TT right now.

The strategy of "buying time" is a classic rhetorical device to stave off failure. Not necessarily saying that we don't need to be patient. What I am saying, though, is that "being patient" and playing "wait-and-see" does not excuse the blatant mistakes that TT has made. And yes, he is entitled to make mistakes - such as K-Rob, for instance. But at least admit the mistakes. TT is too self-righteous to do so, however.

We are coming off a bye week in WORSE shape than when we entered it!! How is that possible??! More problems were created during the bye week than solved!! This just blows me away, and the responsibility is completely TT's. I don't want to hear any BS about injuries. TT did nothing to prepare for these situations at WR and in the secondary.

Because I moved to another state recently, I have had to make a pact with a fan of another team. He, generously, agrees to watch the Packers with me and, in turn, I agree to watch the Broncos with him, since he is also from another state (guess which one?). But I swear, it is unbelievably striking to watch the Broncos on defense. I keep insisting that they must have 12-13 men on the field. The WORST case scenario is that the offense completes a pass, but there are always THREE Broncos there to make the play. Meanwhile, the contrast is striking when we watch the Packers. My Broncos friend laughs at me when I simply pray that we don't turn over the ball on any given offensive play.

I don't accept that this is an appropriate mindframe for a fan of the Green Bay Packers franchise, the proudest franchise in all of sports.

Announcement

STIRRING THE TT POT AGAIN ..."FOR THE FUTURE"

STIRRING THE TT POT AGAIN ..."FOR THE FUTURE"

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment