David Carr?

[vince]

TT is the only one in the organization that thinks Rodgers has a chance to be anything. I am willing to bet that if all things were equal, Martin would beat out Rodgers. I just don't see TT letting McCarthy go with his gut on this one.

How do you know this?

[Merlin]

If I can find the quotes I will post them. But in a nutshell, McCarthy had the opportunity to take Rodgers over Smith in the draft, there is a reason he went with Smith.

[Partial]

TT is the only one in the organization that thinks Rodgers has a chance to be anything. I am willing to bet that if all things were equal, Martin would beat out Rodgers. I just don't see TT letting McCarthy go with his gut on this one.

How do you know this?

He has no idea what he is talking about, Vince.

[vince]

TT is the only one in the organization that thinks Rodgers has a chance to be anything. I am willing to bet that if all things were equal, Martin would beat out Rodgers. I just don't see TT letting McCarthy go with his gut on this one.

How do you know this?

He has no idea what he is talking about, Vince.

Just wanted to see how he responds, Partial. I'm not trying to chase anyone away from the board, but hopefully people can stop spewing unsupportable idiocy.

[Rastak]

TT is the only one in the organization that thinks Rodgers has a chance to be anything. I am willing to bet that if all things were equal, Martin would beat out Rodgers. I just don't see TT letting McCarthy go with his gut on this one.

How do you know this?

He has no idea what he is talking about, Vince.

Just wanted to see how he responds, Partial. I'm not trying to chase anyone away from the board, but hopefully people can stop spewing unsupportable idiocy.

So how does each person in the front office view Rodgers?

[Merlin]

Why is it when you don't agree you resort to name calling? Unsupportable? LOL....look at the facts before you go off the deep end band wagon buddies. Obviously the decision to pick up Rodgers wasn't Mike Sherman's when he was with Green Bay. In fact it was TT's first draft pick for the Packers. Carr was cut from Houston who's offensive coordinator happens to be Mike Sherman. Since Carr and Rodgers are cut from the same mold and play remarkably similar I would say that Sherman doesn't believe in that system (among many many other coaches in the NFL). The 49er's passed up on Rodgers in favor of Alex Smith by who? Then offensive coordinator Mike McCarthy who has a knack for bringing up QB's. Enter McCarthy in Green Bay. Nall is let go and Ingle Martin is drafted in the 5th round (148th Pick) overall. So it's easy to see who made this call, not TT, McCarthy. He liked what he saw although he agreed he was raw.

Because Aaron Rodgers was the #1 overall pick in 2005, McCarthy the new head coach has no choice but to see what he has in him (the fact that TT won't admit he screwed up plays into it as well). Martin does not get the opportunities that he needs to prove otherwise. McCarthy numerous times talks about the potential of Martin but only states a few niceties about Rodgers.

If you can't put two and two together to see it equals four then I guess it stands to reason that the only argument you can bring is to revert to some kind of childish name calling ritual. I guess when articles are published I must be the only one that reads them and actually thinks about it instead of saying "idiots"...

[LaFours]

If you can't put two and two together to see it equals four then I guess it stands to reason that the only argument you can bring is to revert to some kind of childish name calling ritual. I guess when articles are published I must be the only one that reads them and actually thinks about it instead of saying "idiots"...

But it equaled 5 in 1984. Isn't that in direct contradiction to your aforementioned analogy?

[Zool]

Why is it when you don't agree you resort to name calling? Unsupportable? LOL....look at the facts before you go off the deep end band wagon buddies. Obviously the decision to pick up Rodgers wasn't Mike Sherman's when he was with Green Bay. In fact it was TT's first draft pick for the Packers. Carr was cut from Houston who's offensive coordinator happens to be Mike Sherman. Since Carr and Rodgers are cut from the same mold and play remarkably similar I would say that Sherman doesn't believe in that system (among many many other coaches in the NFL). The 49er's passed up on Rodgers in favor of Alex Smith by who? Then offensive coordinator Mike McCarthy who has a knack for bringing up QB's. Enter McCarthy in Green Bay. Nall is let go and Ingle Martin is drafted in the 5th round (148th Pick) overall. So it's easy to see who made this call, not TT, McCarthy. He liked what he saw although he agreed he was raw.

Because Aaron Rodgers was the #1 overall pick in 2005, McCarthy the new head coach has no choice but to see what he has in him (the fact that TT won't admit he screwed up plays into it as well). Martin does not get the opportunities that he needs to prove otherwise. McCarthy numerous times talks about the potential of Martin but only states a few niceties about Rodgers.

If you can't put two and two together to see it equals four then I guess it stands to reason that the only argument you can bring is to revert to some kind of childish name calling ritual. I guess when articles are published I must be the only one that reads them and actually thinks about it instead of saying "idiots"...

To be fair, no one called you an idiot. He said people coming in here spewing idiocy.

[vince]

Obviously the decision to pick up Rodgers wasn't Mike Sherman's when he was with Green Bay.In fact it was TT's first draft pick for the Packers. Carr was cut from Houston who's offensive coordinator happens to be Mike Sherman. Since Carr and Rodgers are cut from the same mold and play remarkably similar I would say that Sherman doesn't believe in that system (among many many other coaches in the NFL). The 49er's passed up on Rodgers in favor of Alex Smith by who? Then offensive coordinator Mike McCarthy who has a knack for bringing up QB's. Enter McCarthy in Green Bay. Nall is let go and Ingle Martin is drafted in the 5th round (148th Pick) overall. So it's easy to see who made this call, not TT, McCarthy. He liked what he saw although he agreed he was raw.

Because Aaron Rodgers was the #1 overall pick in 2005, McCarthy the new head coach has no choice but to see what he has in him (the fact that TT won't admit he screwed up plays into it as well). Martin does not get the opportunities that he needs to prove otherwise. McCarthy numerous times talks about the potential of Martin but only states a few niceties about Rodgers.

If you can't put two and two together to see it equals four then I guess it stands to reason that the only argument you can bring is to revert to some kind of childish name calling ritual. I guess when articles are published I must be the only one that reads them and actually thinks about it instead of saying "idiots"...

Merlin, I apologize for insinuating that you were spewing idiocy. However, please re-read your statement. You state these things as facts.

They're not. They're complete conjecture on your part.

Perhaps Sherman WAS high on Rodgers, but feels that Carr makes poor decisions. Neither you nor anyone but the people directly involved know this.

You don't know that McCarthy doesn't think Rodgers has the potential to lead the team. Every statement I've heard from him indicates just the opposite.

Your complete conjecture that McCarthy is higher on Martin than Rodgers based on your interpretation of how many accolades he's delivered on each of their behalf is not only pure speculation, but HIGHLY questionable speculation at that.

I'd love to see Martin beat out Rodgers for the back-up QB job, or see Rodgers traded away for Moss. That would be a clear indication of the truth of the speculation you position as fact.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying you don't know what you're talking about - since you believe your theories and speculation are truths. Bring the articles, if you can.

Then you can say two and two equals four. With your "facts" above, you're adding one and one and getting fifteen.

[Patler]

Why is it when you don't agree you resort to name calling? Unsupportable? LOL....look at the facts before you go off the deep end band wagon buddies. Obviously the decision to pick up Rodgers wasn't Mike Sherman's when he was with Green Bay. In fact it was TT's first draft pick for the Packers. Carr was cut from Houston who's offensive coordinator happens to be Mike Sherman. Since Carr and Rodgers are cut from the same mold and play remarkably similar I would say that Sherman doesn't believe in that system (among many many other coaches in the NFL). The 49er's passed up on Rodgers in favor of Alex Smith by who? Then offensive coordinator Mike McCarthy who has a knack for bringing up QB's. Enter McCarthy in Green Bay. Nall is let go and Ingle Martin is drafted in the 5th round (148th Pick) overall. So it's easy to see who made this call, not TT, McCarthy. He liked what he saw although he agreed he was raw.

Because Aaron Rodgers was the #1 overall pick in 2005, McCarthy the new head coach has no choice but to see what he has in him (the fact that TT won't admit he screwed up plays into it as well). Martin does not get the opportunities that he needs to prove otherwise. McCarthy numerous times talks about the potential of Martin but only states a few niceties about Rodgers.

If you can't put two and two together to see it equals four then I guess it stands to reason that the only argument you can bring is to revert to some kind of childish name calling ritual. I guess when articles are published I must be the only one that reads them and actually thinks about it instead of saying "idiots"...

Facts? FACTS???
Good gosh, you've got draft decisions being made by offensive coordinators, coordinators and headcoaches over ruling GMs, an OC making a decision to cut a QB the GM just paid $8 million to last year, whatever you need to support a personal opinion you have about Rodgers and/or Carr.

McCarthy made the call on Martin, but Sherman didn't on Rodgers??? If either one influenced TT on either draft pick (which I completely doubt), it would more likely have been Sherman about Rodgers than McCarthy about Martin. After all, Sherman had been GM and most certainly had been privy to in-season scouting reports and the like in preparation for the draft, which he would have conducted had he not been replaced in January. During the season coaches are not much involved in college prospects (unless the HC is the GM), so I doubt McCarthy came to GB with much knowledge on Martin. Prior to the draft he was interviewing and hiring a staff, setting out his plans for his first ever stint as a head coach, etc. I sincerely doubt he had much time to evaluate a prospect as inconsequential as Ingle Martin for mor than a few minutes, if that.

I won't even bother discussing the "he did influence it" / "he didn't influence it" contradictions you have for the 49ers and the Texans. I don't have enough time.

[Merlin]

No way Sherman had anything to do with the Rodgers pick. Think about it, picking Rodgers goes against everything we know to be true about Sherman (e.g. he drafts for the now, good QB's projects can be taken in later rounds, etc). Ingle Martin in the 5th? Once you get down that far, the GM is going to have a lot less to say about the pick and look more to his coaches and scouts for guidance. As far as Smith in San Fransisco, McCarthy did play a large role in that decision because of his background with QB's.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Ingle Martin in the 5th? Once you get down that far, the GM is going to have a lot less to say about the pick and look more to his coaches and scouts for guidance.

Scouts? Of course. With every pick. Coaches? Highly doubtful. The coach doesn't have time to research and interview every player--like the scouts do (that's their job). I'd think it's more likely the coach would have an opinion on the top picks. Guys they he may have personally interviewed. The later picks are guys that are more likely to recommened by souts--like Alonzo Highsmith.

[vince]

TT is the only one in the organization that thinks Rodgers has a chance to be anything. I am willing to bet that if all things were equal, Martin would beat out Rodgers. I just don't see TT letting McCarthy go with his gut on this one.

How do you know this?

He has no idea what he is talking about, Vince.

Just wanted to see how he responds, Partial. I'm not trying to chase anyone away from the board, but hopefully people can stop spewing unsupportable idiocy.

So how does each person in the front office view Rodgers?

I don't know. The speculation that Merlin put forth is as good as any I've seen, but McCarthy's statements about Rodgers don't really support those claims, but you can't believe everyhting you read either.

[pbmax]

How is it that failure by the GM to cut someone we don't like is almost immediately converted into the pernicious character flaw "can't admit he was wrong"?

Aaron Rodgers has been a professional QB for two years and has not started. The fact that he is still on the roster is proof Thompson can't admit a mistake?

Where are Taco Wallace and Matt O'Dwyer?

[Merlin]

Obviously the decision to pick up Rodgers wasn't Mike Sherman's when he was with Green Bay.In fact it was TT's first draft pick for the Packers. Carr was cut from Houston who's offensive coordinator happens to be Mike Sherman. Since Carr and Rodgers are cut from the same mold and play remarkably similar I would say that Sherman doesn't believe in that system (among many many other coaches in the NFL). The 49er's passed up on Rodgers in favor of Alex Smith by who? Then offensive coordinator Mike McCarthy who has a knack for bringing up QB's. Enter McCarthy in Green Bay. Nall is let go and Ingle Martin is drafted in the 5th round (148th Pick) overall. So it's easy to see who made this call, not TT, McCarthy. He liked what he saw although he agreed he was raw.

Because Aaron Rodgers was the #1 overall pick in 2005, McCarthy the new head coach has no choice but to see what he has in him (the fact that TT won't admit he screwed up plays into it as well). Martin does not get the opportunities that he needs to prove otherwise. McCarthy numerous times talks about the potential of Martin but only states a few niceties about Rodgers.

If you can't put two and two together to see it equals four then I guess it stands to reason that the only argument you can bring is to revert to some kind of childish name calling ritual. I guess when articles are published I must be the only one that reads them and actually thinks about it instead of saying "idiots"...

Merlin, I apologize for insinuating that you were spewing idiocy. However, please re-read your statement. You state these things as facts.

They're not. They're complete conjecture on your part.

Perhaps Sherman WAS high on Rodgers, but feels that Carr makes poor decisions. Neither you nor anyone but the people directly involved know this.

You don't know that McCarthy doesn't think Rodgers has the potential to lead the team. Every statement I've heard from him indicates just the opposite.

Your complete conjecture that McCarthy is higher on Martin than Rodgers based on your interpretation of how many accolades he's delivered on each of their behalf is not only pure speculation, but HIGHLY questionable speculation at that.

I'd love to see Martin beat out Rodgers for the back-up QB job, or see Rodgers traded away for Moss. That would be a clear indication of the truth of the speculation you position as fact.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying you don't know what you're talking about - since you believe your theories and speculation are truths. Bring the articles, if you can.

Then you can say two and two equals four. With your "facts" above, you're adding one and one and getting fifteen.

I know it's hard for people to analyze things to the extent that I do. That isn't a cut on you or anyone else, that's just how it is, I over analyze everything (ask my wife it drives her nuts). And you are right that it may be part speculation on my part but it doesn't take much to look at the parties involved, know how they work and come up with a viable analysis that contains mostly fact. Sherman would be scared shitless to draft a QB that high because he doesn't coach them well and he always drafts for need even if his analysis is way off on the pick at times. TT is not going to trust the number one overall pick to anyone but himself. By the 5th round, he is asking for ideas. McCarthy watched Martin in a combine and liked what he saw. Martin probably wouldn't have been taken at all in the draft had McCarthy not liked him. He is from Furman, who the hell ever even heard of the guy until McCarthy brought his name up back then? Contrary to popular belief, McCarthy did go to combo's and watch players. Nall didn't fit for whatever reason, I wish I knew that one because he was a viable backup if nothing else. You can call it speculative all you want and that's fine. In order to make heads or tales of anything the front office does you need to look deep, analyze everything and come to a conclusion. I call it fact because that's what I see, it isn't what someone else said.