You Heard It Here First

[Bretsky]

crap; DP

[Bretsky]

10 drafted players and Al Harris

And who was going back four years ?? I was using the three years Sherman was in charge of the draft.

10 players plus Al Harris isn't terrible for three years

[retailguy]

10 drafted players and Al Harris

And who was going back four years ?? I was using the three years Sherman was in charge of the draft.

10 players plus Al Harris isn't terrible for three years

Considering he only drafted 23 that's like 44% still playing!

[wist43]

What do you think Pickett and Woodson were Wist?


You said after the 4-12 season that the Packers were at minimum 3 years away but more likely 5. That was before you knew what Thompson was about or how he would approach needs. At that time you said the Packers scouting staff was doomed for failure and that TT was going to bring much of the same ballerinas.

Now, 2 years later AFTER Thompson addressed 2 major needs in FA *CB and DT* you're saying that Thompson could have and should have filled all of these holes that you yourself said would be impossible to build in 2 or less years.

The fact is, the only reason we have a team that stands a chance to be pretty average and still have the $$ to go damn crazy if they want is becuase Thompson can build an average team while using about 1/2 of his financial recourses. Depth like you find in SD takes time to build. They have ZERO FA's but they draft for BPA every year and eventually it all piles up to the point where no team can field a team as powerfull as yours.

We're on that track and yes it does take a little longer but that is the way it works. If Favre leaves, we have to hope we get fortunate with a real stud and we will probably struggle but I believe, and at one time you did too, that the Packers are doomed for now anyway. They might as well build it right. They might as well build from the ground up. You'd be more willing to do this if you acctually believed what you said 2 off seasons ago but somehow I don't think you remember how bad this team was and to some degree still is.

Think about what you're saying, "we have a team that stands a chance to be pretty average"...

I was one of the loudest in terms of saying how bad the team was - before the record relected it - and, I've given TT plenty of credit for restocking the team to get them to where they are now;

however,

This is TT's 3rd draft and off season, and given the fluid situation that personnel movement is in the NFL... it's not unreasonable to have some expectation that some of the teams weaknesses should be addressed directly, and immediately.

I like Harrell a lot, but the difference between him and Pickett, Williams, and Jolly isn't as great as the difference between Lynch and Morency; or, Meachem and Ferguson or Martin.

And since TT said he was considering Meachem at 16, he obviously had him rated highly. Would drafting Meachem help us "win now"??? No, but if his talent is rated as being at least comparable to Harrell's, then picking Meachem makes the team better than picking Harrell.

Some team building algebra... I'm not even alluding to, or speculating about the success of the players being talked about. I'm simply making an academic observation projecting that all will be at least equally successful.

[SudsMcBucky]

Re: You Heard It Here First

[quote="retailguy

Harv, what ticks me off, (not with you, just in general), is this is what I've been saying for 2 months now. WHO IS GOING TO HELP in '07? Everyone told me to wait for the draft, I did, NOW WHAT?

As for the draft class, it could wind up being OK, maybe even good. Don't know, and today, don't care. I want to know what happens in September 2007, not September of 2009.[/quote]

It's just my opinion, but I have a feeling TT will become active during preseason cuts, with a lot of cap room to fill some of those voids for short-term fixes with camp cuts. I know it's another team's garbage, but sometimes, a team can just be really loaded at a position and cut a vet for a promising rook that could help us temporarily.

[swede]

I like Harrell a lot, but the difference between him and Pickett, Williams, and Jolly isn't as great as the difference between Lynch and Morency; or, Meachem and Ferguson or Martin.

I think dominant defensive lines screw up the other team's offense a lot more than the presence of a good running back or a good wide receiver screws up a defense.

I can't see how either Lynch (who was gone at 12) or Meacham would have singlehandedly change this team's fortunes (or the fortunes of the teams that drafted them). I doubt either will have as much impact as Reggie Bush did, and that wasn't much either.

What I like about picking defense in the first round is the higher possibility that players can be productive in their rookie seasons.

[HarveyWallbangers]

And since TT said he was considering Meachem at 16, he obviously had him rated highly. Would drafting Meachem help us "win now"??? No, but if his talent is rated as being at least comparable to Harrell's, then picking Meachem makes the team better than picking Harrell.

Maybe Thompson and the Packers scouting staff felt Meachem's talent wasn't "at least comparable to Harrell". Otherwise, they likely would have taken him.

[Bossman641]

Re: You Heard It Here First

[quote=SudsMcBucky]

It's just my opinion, but I have a feeling TT will become active during preseason cuts, with a lot of cap room to fill some of those voids for short-term fixes with camp cuts. I know it's another team's garbage, but sometimes, a team can just be really loaded at a position and cut a vet for a promising rook that could help us temporarily.

I highly doubt it. June 1st cuts, especially with the increase in the salary cap, are a thing of the past. Maybe we'd get a young backup with some potential (TT's favorite), but I highly doubt us picking up anyone productive.

[MJZiggy]

We had that problem last year didn't we? Everyone was salivating over June 1 cuts that never came.

Then again, TT did pick up one or two with roster cutdowns IIRC (unless I don't RC)

[Patler]

10 drafted players and Al Harris

And who was going back four years ?? I was using the three years Sherman was in charge of the draft.

10 players plus Al Harris isn't terrible for three years

I think you can scratch Marques Anderson off your list too. I believe he was released and not picked up by anyone at the start of last season. I don't think he played at all in 2006.

[4and12to12and4]

Re: You Heard It Here First

This will go down as a good draft class. That's going out on a limb for most people, but I'll say it now. I'm optimistic and realistic. I don't like how Ted Thompson has handled FA this offseason. I understand that he probably tried to get a lot more guys than we even know about, but he wasn't successful.

However, I can't think this is a bad draft--since we drafted so many guys that I liked when I did my pre-draft research (Harrell, Jackson, Rouse, Barbre, Clowney). I liked the Crosby pick. I liked the TE in the last round. Not sure about Jones or Wynn. I didn't really research Jones, and I didn't like Wynn much, but maybe he can be a good hybrid RB/FB (like Da Poop). Don't like the Bishop pick because I'm not sure he has the speed to succeed in our scheme. I think Johnson and Simpson have a good shot at making the team over him--provided they stay clean. Not sure about the Hall pick, but we could use some help on ST. Plus, he provides some roster flexibility with FB and LB background.

Overall, I think this class will fall somewhere between 2005 (hard to say; looks average, but Rodgers could change that and losing Murphy really hurt) and 2006 (looks very promising). Grades are silly, I know, but looking back in 5 years, I'm going to predict this will look like a solid B+ draft class.

I know half of this place won't believe me when I say this, but Harv, I don't necessarily disagree with you.

That being said, I'm not sure that this draft class will help much in 2007, which is what I've maintained all along. Will they play supporting roles? Of course, hell the RB might even end up starting. But, realistically, how many balls are the 3rd rd WR, and the 5th rd WR going to catch? 10 to 15 each?

Maybe the DT comes in and lights the world on fire, but, that sure didn't happen with Mario last year. Heck even Julius Peppers needed some time to get acclimated and he's a far better talent than this guy. The RB has the best hope of contributing, and that's not even a sure thing.

Harv, what ticks me off, (not with you, just in general), is this is what I've been saying for 2 months now. WHO IS GOING TO HELP in '07? Everyone told me to wait for the draft, I did, NOW WHAT?

As for the draft class, it could wind up being OK, maybe even good. Don't know, and today, don't care. I want to know what happens in September 2007, not September of 2009.

I agree with you guys probably for different reasons than each of you have; and, I agree that this will probably be a pretty good draft. If Harrell stays healthy, I think he has a chance to be a damn good player.

First off, I agree with Harv in that this years help should be coming from the '05 and '06 draft choices. I expect improvement out of Colledge, Spitz, Jennings, Hawk, Jolly, and Underwood.

That said, it's not enough, and the Packers really don't stand much of a chance of winning anything. They may have a shot at the division for no other reason than it's pathetic, but they certainly don't scare anyone.

Moving forward, Favre sets his records, has his fill of TT's 10 year plan, and retires... fast forward to the '08 draft. TT will not, under any cirmcustances, draft to fill a need - still a huge hole at WR; CB's are a year older; still no legit TE; and even though I'm hoping that Jackson can be an every down back - I'm not really holding my breath - so you've probably still got a hole at RB.

How in the living hell does he fill all those holes in the '08 draft and offseason??? And, of course we're facing the prospect of not only not having Favre, worse than that, we're going to have Aaron Rodgers under center!!!!

So that gets you thru the '08 season w/o really having a chance to win - and TT still committed to not drafting for need - of course.

That will get you thru 4 years of pretty much nothing under TT... which brings me to my point...

I'm beginning to see TT as a very good talent evaluator, but a poor GM... I know I just said a couple of weeks ago that I thought that TT was a good GM; but, really what I should have said is what I've just said - good scout/talent evaluator, poor GM.

He is beyond rigid... and, steadfastly refuses to make moves to address needs. A good GM needs to do more than just pick the BPA... he needs to flesh out a complete roster. TT believes that, over time, and draft after mind numbing draft, that eventually the talent curve will catch up to the need curve, and all will be well... that's all well and good if your plan to eventually be a winner is a 10-15 year plan.

Pure and simple, if you are to ever have a shot at a championship, you have to actively, and aggressively address needs at some point... TT will never, ever do that - and, b/c of that, and many other reasons, I don't think that TT will ever be capable of bringing a championship back to GB.

TT is a damn good scout... I'd like to see him go back to that. 10 year rebuilding plans just don't cut it in the NFL.

Wow!! That was depressing, Wist. I know your a skeptical Rat and all, but, how 'bout comin' off the cliff for a moment, and listen to reason.

It's real easy to complain about the GM of your team. In fact, every team in the league could be doing that at this moment, except Colts fans. Why? Because they have the trophy this year. So, unless you actually WIN the Superbowl, you've really done nothing. I live in the Chicagoland area, and most of my friends are Bears junkys. They bitched all year about the Grossman/Griese decision, especially in the first half of the final game, when we picked three off of him. But, then, Griese came in and had two picks himself, and they shut the hell up real quick.

Having said that, we only know a small portion of what goes on in TT's office. We know that last year he tried getting more players here than Chuck through FA. Alot of players didn't want to come to a 4-12 team who's HOF QB may be retiring. He tried to get Moss this year, and when he picked Harrell, probably thought that was still a legitimate option. (Not that any of the receivers left were worth a damn anyways, I would prefer to just keep Holiday and Ruvell with Jennings, KRob, and Driver, than have to try to fight with an agent for an overpriced 16th pick receiver that probably wouldn't even make the cut over the above mentioned).

TT has drastically improved the talent of our defense. There were times last year, when they put it all together, and had some really good games and portions of games (the youngest defense in the NFL, mind you). Obvoiusly our O-line and D-line will be even more improved this year, and TT knows that's the key to winning.

Look how Matt Millen has tried to put a team together, thinking that great receivers and skill players will win ballgames. They don't. It's almost always won in the trenches as long as your skill players are a little better than average, which is what I think our receiving core and DB's are right now. The RB position doesn't worry me, it's more about the blocking scheme and those guys handling their responsibilities, than it is the running back. (ask Edgerrin James). Only a couple RB's in the league are worth investing large sums of money into. (Larry, Ladanian, and, maybe, Reggie).

I'm not saying I agree with all of TT's moves, but, I know that our defense could be a force this coming year, and with Brett back there, who knows, we could get deep into the playoffs. Heck, we almost made the playoffs last year, on a roll. Look how we played against the Bears.

I don't think it is as bleak as you suggest. I have seen much improvement in alot of areas. And, as it has been pointed out in many other threads here, if TT was just ignorantly picking by BPA, we would have Brady Quinn right now.

So, my take on TT is that he truly DID think we need more depth at tackle, and if Harrell works out, we will be able to rest our starters and rotate during the game, allowing our defensive line to be dominant in the fourth quarter of games, which will cause all kinds of problems for tired offensive lineman and Qb's and will allow our backers and DB's to make plays in the crucial and final moments of games. (Remember the Cowboys of the 90's, that was their formula for success. Their o-line and d-line eventually wore out all its opponents and Irvin, Emmitt, and co. reaped the benefits.

I'm glad our GM isn't running things like Detroit and Washington where tons of money is being thrown at skill players, and there is no steady improvement in their clubs. We HAVE seen improvement, and I believe if Brett stays healthy all year, we will be back in the playoffs this year.

I know that TT probably is thinking "damn, if I knew quinn would be sitting there this year, I wouldn't have gone after Aaron", but know one could have predicted that happening.

So, take a chill pill, we are a young improving team, and defense wins championships, not offense. Even the Colts' defense had great postseason games when their offense struggled, and if not for their defense, wouldn't have got past the Ravens last year to win the SB. I like our team and TT seems to pick guys who love the game of football and bust their asses out on the field. Let's give him some accolades for that, at least.

[retailguy]

We had that problem last year didn't we? Everyone was salivating over June 1 cuts that never came.

Then again, TT did pick up one or two with roster cutdowns IIRC (unless I don't RC)

Agreed. Yes, we'll probably get ONE guy, maybe TWO if we're lucky.... Most likely, we've got who we've got for 2007...

[RashanGary]

RG,

I set the bar at improvement. Thompson is collecting resources and buidling a base without overextending or even extending for that matter. IF we improve, without using our recources I think that is a good thing.

If we do improve and our team does win 8 or more games out of this tough schedule what are you going to say about the job Thompson has done.

I'll be here and I've said a multiple times over the last couple weeks that I'm going to hold Ted accountable if we start to regress. Are you going to be here to give him credit if we take antoher step forward. I know where you stand as far as what you expect but if it does happen are you going to be here patting Thompson on the back?

[retailguy]

RG,

I set the bar at improvement. Thompson is collecting resources and buidling a base without overextending or even extending for that matter. IF we improve, without using our recources I think that is a good thing.

If we do improve and our team does win 8 or more games out of this tough schedule what are you going to say about the job Thompson has done.

I'll be here and I've said a multiple times over the last couple weeks that I'm going to hold Ted accountable if we start to regress. Are you going to be here to give him credit if we take antoher step forward. I know where you stand as for as what you expect but if it does happen are you going to be here patting Thompson on the back?

If this team even sniffs at 8 wins, I'll be doing cartwheels in the street. I think 5 wins is an accomplishment, and I fear that is optimistic.

Will I be patting Thompson on the back? No probably not. 8 wins is nothing to get excited about while Brett gets another step closer to retirement.

I'm not a Thompson hater. I know you keep trying to make me out to be one, and I guess you'll die trying. I don't hate the guy, I just vehemently disagree with his "short term plan". I think a more robust short term plan can be implemented without disrupting the long term plan. I happen to agree with MOST of the longterm plan.

[RashanGary]

I think the main difference we have is that you think it's possible to go the the SB if we make the right moves and I think that there is no amount of moves that can be made that would bring this team to the SuperBowl right now.


Your bar is a little higher than mine, but I think it would be safe to say that if we finish the season with an 8-8 mark on a hard schedule that we are average and from there; you'd probably be willing to say Thompson is average even on the short-term and that is not including the long term implications; right?

If we can't agree on what success, failure and status quo is then all of this interesting debate will never have a form of measure. I enjoy these conversations so I'd like them to have some focus, know what I mean?