Do or die year for TT

[Rastak]

Jarrett? Could be great. Could be another Mike Williams. You're starting to sound like tank with your infatuation with the likes of Jarrett and Branch.


Jarrett is far from a sure thing. I'm not losing sleep that Thompson didn't trade up to get him. Sidney Rice was intriguing. Until I see the two guys he drafted, I'll trust the organizations's instincts for finding WRs--after the last 2 drafts.

Yea, I watched a bunch of Rice highlights and although the guy is really young, he sure had some nice catches. I know you slid in the little "Rice is always covered in his highlights" comment a little while back but when he was covered he still came down with the ball, and he had his share of open catches. Since I'm in pessimistic mode I'll have to wait and see but he's a tall dude that seems to catch the ball, unlike his buddy Troy.

[mraynrand]

Re: Excuse

He took over the worste situtation possible. Aging talent and bad contracts.

You're better off starting from scratch than starting as it falls. Like Lurker said, they just have to do better than 6-10. If they completely flop, I don't think there is endless support.

Sooner or later the "Sherman card" you guys keep playing is gonna wear out. Sherman did'nt trade away our best WR for a 2 rd pick.

Well Sherman did trade our best corner away for a 2nd round pick in nearly identical circumstances. And sooner or later the "Walker card" you keep playing is going to wear out.

I don't think the McKenzie and Walker situations were nearly identical. But I agree with your central point. A lot of teams have had to deal with malignant players. You get the best draft pick that you can and move on. It's a waste of time to lord it over the GM.

[Partial]

My thoughts are this:

TT turned over the roster almost entirely. It is going to take some time to see if the players he brought in turn out to be better than the players he sent away at the time he let them go.

That would be progress if he does that. Right now, I don't think they're at that point.

I think Rodgers is going to look like a stupid pick in retrospect, but it was impossible to predict that Favre would play this long. If Favre returns next year they certainly will trade Rodgers. This team would look a heck of a lot stronger imo if they had added another defender in the first instead of Rodgers, but I see why they did draft him. Also, you've got to consider one of the guys that should be reaching his prime(if he worked out) was forced into retirement through injury. These facts alone by him one more year.

Ultimately, since 2006 was really the year where he began choosing players that would be on the field and playing (rodgers, murphy weren't, both were early picks), I think that is the first draft he can really be judged upon.

I think TT has one more draft to prove himself, and two more season. If there isn't some sense of improvement or we don't see a true playmaker step up, its possible he could be gone. I would guess he has at least one year post Favre to land a playmaker, simply because we don't have any right now.

Hopefully, the first day picks from 05 (underwood, collins) take it to the next level and are the two starters at safety. Hopefully, Boston College corner becomes the best nickelback in the league and a great return man. Hopefully, Spitz, Colledge, and Moll each add ten pounds of muscle and all grow into their physiques more while keeping their speed. Hopefully, AJ Hawk takes another step towards superstardom and becomes a true three-down defender. Hopefully, Jennings and Harrell become good players with the potential to become great players.

IF all those things happen, then TT may have the makings of a championship team a few years down the road. Right now, they are not even close and have far too many things that have to go right.

If half of those things happen and TT continues to stockpile players, the team will be alright just by virtue of strength in numbers and lots of players in their physical prime by 2008-2009.

[Partial]

Jarrett? Could be great. Could be another Mike Williams. You're starting to sound like tank with your infatuation with the likes of Jarrett and Branch.


Jarrett is far from a sure thing. I'm not losing sleep that Thompson didn't trade up to get him. Sidney Rice was intriguing. Until I see the two guys he drafted, I'll trust the organizations's instincts for finding WRs--after the last 2 drafts.

Dude Branch is going to be good. He is huge. I thought he was getting knocked badly for conditioning, etc. Lots of players are poorly conditioned in college. Why is this? Because their is a lot more to college than football. I am sure he was out their drinking, partying, eating late night pizza, etc. I can't fault the man for having a good time. I think he'll become a stud. He just has too much physical talent(and I agree you cannot rely on this solely) to be average.

[mraynrand]

About the central point of this thread. This is by no means a do or die year for TT. The guy has a five year contract. He's building for next year and the year after. I'm certain that he's not counting on Favre to be his QB on his remade tam. In fact, he's probably very grateful that Favre is staying on, because Favre ensures that the Packers remain a prominent team and, as long as Favre plays close to his best football, he's good for a couple of extra wins. This season all hinges on emerging playmakers . If the Packers get big years from 2-3 guys (like Jennings a RB and perhaps Collins, Hawk and/Harrell on D), they might be able to surprise some people. The difficult downside may be some of their aging guys (Favre, Harris, Clifton). But Thompson has plenty of time. Even if their record is poor, I predict he'll get an extra year or two just because Favre will retire and you have to allow some fall out from that. I do think it's interesting that the Packes did nothing pretty much at the QB postion. They have to be confident about Rodgers. and if they're right, that could make all the difference. If ARod follows Favre and plays more like Hasselbeck, the Packers could be in good shape for a long time.

[Brainerd]

Why should he get an extra year because Favre retires? Isn't it his job to plan for a player's retirement by having someone ready to take over?

He turned over the roster of the Packers to build his own team. Fine. It was his call. Getting an extra year to continue a possible failed plan simply because Favre retires is silly.

[Lurker64]

Why should he get an extra year because Favre retires? Isn't it his job to plan for a player's retirement by having someone ready to take over?

He turned over the roster of the Packers to build his own team. Fine. It was his call. Getting an extra year to continue a possible failed plan simply because Favre retires is silly.

But if it takes Rodgers a year to really settle into being the starting QB, but handles the role well the year after, you can't really blame Thompson for that initial year. I think that's the logic.

[Joemailman]

Why should he get an extra year because Favre retires? Isn't it his job to plan for a player's retirement by having someone ready to take over?

He turned over the roster of the Packers to build his own team. Fine. It was his call. Getting an extra year to continue a possible failed plan simply because Favre retires is silly.

The idea is that you need a year after Favre retires to judge whether or not TT has built a team that can be successful without Favre.

[bbbffl66]

Why should he get an extra year because Favre retires? Isn't it his job to plan for a player's retirement by having someone ready to take over?

He turned over the roster of the Packers to build his own team. Fine. It was his call. Getting an extra year to continue a possible failed plan simply because Favre retires is silly.

The idea is that you need a year after Favre retires to judge whether or not TT has built a team that can be successful without Favre.

So then we're on the 5 year rebuilding project. Great. It took the Saints 1 year with the right people in place. But I'm sure all the Packer fans will be patient for 2 or 3 more years of 6-10 records. Right?

[HarveyWallbangers]

Well, we were 8-8 last year. Personally, I'm not ready to write in 6-10 for this year.

[BradStrand]

TT shouldnt get an 'extra' year after Favre retires. He has made no illusions about the fact that this team will be built with defense. After Favre goes it will be readily apparent whether or not he has suceeded.

[Joemailman]

Why should he get an extra year because Favre retires? Isn't it his job to plan for a player's retirement by having someone ready to take over?

He turned over the roster of the Packers to build his own team. Fine. It was his call. Getting an extra year to continue a possible failed plan simply because Favre retires is silly.

The idea is that you need a year after Favre retires to judge whether or not TT has built a team that can be successful without Favre.

So then we're on the 5 year rebuilding project. Great. It took the Saints 1 year with the right people in place. But I'm sure all the Packer fans will be patient for 2 or 3 more years of 6-10 records. Right?

Tell it to the people who are predicting 6-10. It wasn't me.

[wist43]

Even I don't think they'll go 6-10... I've got them in the 8-8 range.

I think they'll be improved with everyone being a year older... that said, I don't know that this draft did much to improve the overall team, even though I think Harrell can be one hell of a player if he stays healthy (IF).

I really don't know where you guys are getting the idea that TT is on a short leash... he's on the 10 year plan (he can turn the roster over 6 times in that span!!!)

2011 is the earliest I can see him being fired... then we'll have to start over - again.

TT is a good enough talent evaluator that he'll bring in some good players and the Packers won't be a complete disaster during most of his tenure; but, he has no intention of ever working to fill out the roster enough to win a championship.

TT is on a very, very, very, very long leash... no way do they even consider firing him.