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

[Patler]

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?

No, my argument centers around the facts of the past and where the Packers really were in January 2005. A team that was aging and very few young players on which to build a future. My argument also centers around the facts of the present, not just around potential.

I submit the LBs as a group today ARE better than the group in 2005, or the group in 2004. That has nothing to do with potential. However, since all are very young, they can be EXPECTED to become even better. That is a fact that was missing from Diggs, Navies, Thomas and even Lenon. They were all they ever would be, and it wasn't good enough.

The O-line coming out of 2004 had two guys on the downside of their careers and a guy that didn't want to be there. Yes, it would have been good to have been able to keep Wahle; but I submit that wasn't a reasonable alternative in the Spring of 2005. This year's trio of guards and Wells at center are already playing better than the middle of the O-line last year. That has nothing to do with potential, its the current situation. But again, all are young enough to be EXPECTED to get better, something that is entirely the opposite of what could be expected from Ruegamer, Klemm, Rivera, Flanagan or frankly even Wahle. Not that Wahle needed to improve, he didn't. But age catches everyone. and he will be 30 next March so it really won't be all that many years before he will start to decline as well. That's the reality of pro sports. The middle of the O-line as a whole was an area where replacements were needed. Even now is not too soon to be looking for tackles. Clifton and Tauscher are not that far from the inevitable downsides of their career either. SO you have to look not just for backups, but for potential starters as well.

You make a big deal out of the signings of Manual or Woodson. At 10 million for 5 years Manual is barely over the average salary for the 53 man roster. His was not a big money signing. Woodson was signed with available cap space for this year, with minimal impact on future caps. If either or both are released in a year or two, it will hurt nothing. If you can't get the players you want for whatever reason. it is wise to sign those you can to deals that won't hamstring you from FA dealings in future years.

The signing of Kampman and Pickett to front loaded contracts was similarly wise. It ensures more flexibility in the future.

A team doesn't always interest a player they want, and there may not be players you want when you first have the cap space to get them. The smart thing is to do what you can in a way to not harm the future. GB did that very well this year.

Once the base of the roster improves, then will be the time for a big FA splash if possible.

[Patler]

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.

If TT is too self-righteous to admit mistakes, than over the off-season why did he come right out and say that he failed to do a good enough job in replacing the guards? At least give him credit for admitting his draft mistakes by releasing players like Bragg and Cory Rodgers in their first camps, and Hawkins after only one year. He admits he was wrong about players by his actions. Do you think TT would have kept a second punter just because he was a high draft pick?

How are we in worse shape coming out of the bye weak than going into it? The only change was Robinson. Ferguson was hurt going into it. Woodson was hurt going into it, and may be able to play. Driver is healthier. Green is better. Spitz will have had some solid practices to help shake off the rust.

Maybe we should at least let Dendy and Francies play a little before concluding they will be failures. Is Dendy any less likely to succeed just because he wasn't drafted than Hawkins who never even played college football to any extent? Is Francies any less likely to succeed just because he wasn't drafted than Driver who wasn't drafted until the 7th round?

People make too big of a deal about losing Robinson, as if he was an integral part of the offense. He wasn't.

The Packers may be different coming out of the bye. I'm not sure they are "worse".

[FavreChild]

If TT is too self-righteous to admit mistakes, than over the off-season why did he come right out and say that he failed to do a good enough job in replacing the guards?

One situation has nothing to do with the other.

I am not refusing to give TT any credit.

But the current situation is inexcusable. And I predict we *will* hear excuses.

Hopefully we'll pull out a win, anyway. With no thanks to TT.

[SD GB fan]

If TT is too self-righteous to admit mistakes, than over the off-season why did he come right out and say that he failed to do a good enough job in replacing the guards?

One situation has nothing to do with the other.

I am not refusing to give TT any credit.

But the current situation is inexcusable. And I predict we *will* hear excuses.

Hopefully we'll pull out a win, anyway. With no thanks to TT.

so if we win, its not cos of TT
and if we lose, its his fault

a bit tough to come out as a successful GM huh?

[FavreChild]

Yup, pretty much.

But it is true. If we win tomorrow (today), it will be in spite of TT, I predict.

[FavreChild]

Sorry to say - because truly, I am not happy about it - but the "patience" tactic is nothing but a rhetorical strategy. Especially when it was plainly known that the secondary was a weakness! And I have no problem with David Martin filling in at WR, or practice squad folks getting promoted, but again I do not want to hear any excuses should the passing game suffer. Two weeks to get the ship in order. That *is* a management repsonsibility.

I hope everything works out well and that we crush the Dolphins. That would be awesome!! I just can't help but believe in Miami's incompetence more than our own proficiency, unfortunately.

[Patler]

Sorry to say - because truly, I am not happy about it - but the "patience" tactic is nothing but a rhetorical strategy. Especially when it was plainly known that the secondary was a weakness! And I have no problem with David Martin filling in at WR, or practice squad folks getting promoted, but again I do not want to hear any excuses should the passing game suffer. Two weeks to get the ship in order. That *is* a management repsonsibility.

I hope everything works out well and that we crush the Dolphins. That would be awesome!! I just can't help but believe in Miami's incompetence more than our own proficiency, unfortunately.

Look at what other teams did for WRs the last two weeks. There is nothing out there to get. Once the season starts, you are pretty much stuck with what you have on your roster and the practice squad.

What was he supposed to do "to get the ship in order"? Don't just say "get someone". Who?

And as I tried to point out, maybe he has with Dendy, Bush, Francies, etc. One or two might surprise us. Not a certainty, or even a high probability, but we really don't know yet.

[Patler]

But the current situation is inexcusable. And I predict we *will* hear excuses.
.

What is "inexcusable"?

WR? - he lost a good one because of attitude (Walker) and a high draft pick to injury (Murphy). You can blame TT for one if you want (I disagree). He brought 12 into camp, including two high draft picks this year, some veteran free agents, some hold over camp and practice squad guys from last year and some intriguing undrafted rookies. It's not like he did nothing.

Same for DBs. He signed a corner and a safety free agent, he drafted a corner relatively high and a safety, he had 16 rostered in the off season and brought 14 into camp. He didn't like what he saw, so after the final cuts he signed two last cuts from other teams. At this point we don't know if Bush, Dendy, Blackmon, Culver or Peprah can play or not. Who knows, maybe he has "hit" on one or two of them.

[Partial]

Patler, you should be an analyst for a major TV network. You form just about the most reasonable and rational arguments of any I have ever read.

[Patler]

Thanks Partial!

[vince]

Patler, you should be an analyst for a major TV network. You form just about the most reasonable and rational arguments of any I have ever read.

Couldn't agree more. I feel like the monkey below, but in all seriousness, there is nowhere a Packer fan can find the superior knowledge foundation and stat work you bring to us all. Sound, supported arguments... Patler, here's hoping you don't ever go away. Your contributions to this board are significant. Thank you for making them.

[mraynrand]

WR? - he lost a good one because of attitude (Walker)

Well, I think he really lost Walker due to adhering to a particular philosophy. He could have 're-signed' Walker in the 2004 -2005 off season, but that would have meant re-working a five year contract two years early and allowing a guy with about a year and a half of production set the standard for the team (and this assumes that Walker wanted to stay, even with more money - there's no difinitive proof that he would have signed a new deal). Most, if not all, teams don't re-negotiate contracts this early.

The opposing view is that teams with great players eagerly re-up to make sure they lock them in, but this is seems more typical for QBs than wide outs. This was debated ad nauseum, but comes down to this - would there have been any negative fall-out from signing Walker to a new contract in 2004. I don't know the answer.

It does seem as though the NFL standard is for the 'team of origin' not to give in to player demands. Look at some notables: Johnson and McCardell in Tampa, Terry Glenn and Branch in NE, McKenzie and Walker in GB, TO everywhere he plays, etc. One thing seems pretty clear. At some point, you determine that a guy isn't worth what he thinks he is and/or he's become such a problem he isn't worth keeping, and you have to move on.

Still, you can't lose one or more of your best players every year and expect to compete. The loss of McKenzie, Wahle, and Walker in successive years (actually they 'lost' Walker two years in a row - once to injury and once to contract dispute) has had a big impact on this team.

[Patler]

Still, you can't lose one or more of your best players every year and expect to compete. The loss of McKenzie, Wahle, and Walker in successive years (actually they 'lost' Walker two years in a row - once to injury and once to contract dispute) has had a big impact on this team.

You are right, that makes it difficult, but there was a time GB survived those types of losses. You have to draft well and have replacements on board.

Packer starters and significant backups lost as FAs under Wolf:

'93 - Chuck Cecil, Tootie Robbins
'94 - Tony Bennett, Doug Wedell
'95 - Bryce Paup, Joe Sims, Ed West, Darrell Thompson, Tim Hauk, Matt Brock.
'96 - Harry Galbreath, John Jurkovic, Fred Strickland
'97 - Desmond Howard
'98 - Aaron Taylor, Doug Evans, Craig Hentrich, Eugene Robinson, Gabe Wilkins, Edgar Bennett
'99 - Adam Timmerman, Travis Jervey, Bob Kuberski, Sean Landeta, Lamont Hollinquest, Darick Holmes
2000 - Keith McKenzie, Vaughn Booker
2001 - Ross Verba

Lots of All Pros in that group, guys who were close, and others that were key contributors to the Packers. A solid roster survives those types of player losses year after year by drafting well and having replacements like Teague, Sims for Robbins, Johnny Holland, Wayne Simmons, Rivera, Wahle, Tauscher, Clifton, etc.

[Patler]

Patler, you should be an analyst for a major TV network. You form just about the most reasonable and rational arguments of any I have ever read.

Couldn't agree more. I feel like the monkey below, but in all seriousness, there is nowhere a Packer fan can find the superior knowledge foundation and stat work you bring to us all. Sound, supported arguments... Patler, here's hoping you don't ever go away. Your contributions to this board are significant. Thank you for making them.

You people are very kind with your compliments. You also are an extremely knowledgeable group, which keeps everyone on their toes. I find myself verifying everything I write before hitting "submit" because if I don't and make a mistake, someone always catches it! This really is a very fine board for Packer discussion because of all of its members.

[MJZiggy]

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

Ok, so I'm two days late, but welcome to the forum. Admittedly it can be tough to get a word in edgewise in an argument about TT, but I do agree with you here. If drafting Murphy who would have been good and everyone knows it and Jennings who is good in back-to-back years, you can't say he hasn't done ANYTHING, just because he didn't do what you wanted him to. Imagine how our WR corps would look if Murphy had stayed healthy and continued the start he had with us.