What If: Could Ted Have Kept Wahle, McKenzie and Walker?

[pacfan]

Another take on TT and Wahle is the type of player Wahle was. Would Wahle have fit the ZBS or would we have stayed with the power-blocking scheme?

I'm pretty sure Rivera would have been gone because of age. I doubt Joe Johnson would have been on the team and we would have NEVER given up a third for a punter.

TT rewarded the players that performed (Harris, Driver, Barnett) in part because of the cap space and because they kept to themselves and didn't negotiate through the press. Javon wanted his deal reworked after one great season with two years remaining add the lame bitch Drew Rosenhaus and it was a PR nightmare. I think TT did what was right and not let one player hold the team hostage. McKenzie was a loss, but Sherman was a tough coach to play for. McKenzie created leverage with his attitude and his "injury", I don't miss him one bit.

I thought Wolf's (and TT) strategy was to reward your own before paying for outside players.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Another take on TT and Wahle is the type of player Wahle was. Would Wahle have fit the ZBS or would we have stayed with the power-blocking scheme?

Wahle became a complete OG that can fit in any scheme. He was always athletic.

[pbmax]

Wahle would have been tremendous in the ZBS. Of course, as with most players. age is beginning to take its toll. He was injured again last year. That makes two out of three seasons in Carolina he has been off the field for part of the season, doesn't it?

Another take on TT and Wahle is the type of player Wahle was. Would Wahle have fit the ZBS or would we have stayed with the power-blocking scheme?

Wahle became a complete OG that can fit in any scheme. He was always athletic.

[SD GB fan]

ironic that the 2003 o-line hardly missed games together. but as soon as they leave for another team, they get injured. ahh shouldnt have left for the money :P

[swede]

This has turned out to be a more amusing thread than I thought it would be. The "what if" game gets your head spinning after a while. One "what if" event spirals off into many other related effects.

Good work, Rats!

One observation when it comes to TT: By now we are seeing that TT's behaviors as GM seem to follow patterns that involve very cautious participation in FA, trade downs in drafts that rigorously follow a plan for aquiring targeted players, and identifying key players and paying them as the end of their contracts approach.

This year's morphing by NE into a FA spendthrift makes me wonder if TT is also capable of changing his approach at the exact time that key free agents are needed to extend the playoff run of a solid and maturing team.

[ZachMN]

Swede, I think that is the case; he will build a good strong core built around the concept of O and D lines being the strength which allows you to plug in the "skill" positions which in my opinion are easier to cut and paste at a whim. If TT always has a young backup at these key positions and the cap room always ready he could strike when the iron is hot---(not every year to placate a bunch of whiners on message boards who come up with conspiracy stories to explain why we didn't overpay for players who aren't going to substantailly improve the capability to win more games). I know some of you are pissed because we aren't "doing everything for Brett" but he has been more of a liability since that game in St. Louis in the playoffs. When he leaves TT is smart enough to realize that having strong play from both lines will go a long way to making average or servicable qb's and rb's etc. be more than capable of winning. Your secondary automatically gets better when your D Line is tearing things up too. Case in point: Brian Urlacher; when he had those two fat asses in 01 he was on fire when they left or were injured he was slightly above average. Now they have a great line again and what do you know Urlacher is free to go off. Got to go back to work but you get my point.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Swede, I think that is the case; he will build a good strong core built around the concept of O and D lines being the strength which allows you to plug in the "skill" positions which in my opinion are easier to cut and paste at a whim. If TT always has a young backup at these key positions and the cap room always ready he could strike when the iron is hot---(not every year to placate a bunch of whiners on message boards who come up with conspiracy stories to explain why we didn't overpay for players who aren't going to substantailly improve the capability to win more games). I know some of you are pissed because we aren't "doing everything for Brett" but he has been more of a liability since that game in St. Louis in the playoffs. When he leaves TT is smart enough to realize that having strong play from both lines will go a long way to making average or servicable qb's and rb's etc. be more than capable of winning. Your secondary automatically gets better when your D Line is tearing things up too. Case in point: Brian Urlacher; when he had those two fat asses in 01 he was on fire when they left or were injured he was slightly above average. Now they have a great line again and what do you know Urlacher is free to go off. Got to go back to work but you get my point.

Brett had been a lidbility since 2001? I stopped reading after that sentence. Without Favre we woulld of been 2-14 last year.

[BlueBrewer]

Re: What If: Could Ted Have Kept Wahle, McKenzie and Walker

Pretend for a moment that Ted was the GM for the last 7 years. (Here come some groans)

Could Ted have kept Wahle, McKenzie and Walker if he had the same cap flexibility that exists today, rather than the razor thin margin under Sherman's regime?

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry Christmas.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Brett had been a lidbility since 2001? I stopped reading after that sentence. Without Favre we woulld of been 2-14 last year.

Yeah, that kind of hurts his credibility. Not to rehash, but this team would have been horrible the last 6 years without Brett at QB.

[swede]

The playoff game in St. Louis is certainly not the moment that Favre becomes a liability to his team. Even at 37 he is a better QB than two thirds of the league can put out there. It was perhaps the most dramatic first example of how Favre's play suffers from his trying to do too much when the team around him becomes less effective due to age, injury, and attrition.

Anyway, the Favre thing wasn't my point.

My point was that I can see why TT is GMing the way he is right now. But there will be a time, IMHO, when he may need to adjust the way he does things as the team begins to mature and show more talent and experience.

I'm still in awe, I guess, of how the Patriots, whom I loathe deeply, changed their stripes so dramatically in order to get one or two more really good grabs at the brass ring. And I wonder if Ted has it in him to GM this way now but do it another way later as times and circumstances change.

[cpk1994]

With McKenzie, I still don't know what his problem was. I heard money, and I also heard something about him not liking the team. If his problem was with the team, theirs not a lot TT could have done.

I'm not so sure. Ted eventually fired Sherman. If Sherman the coach is gone, and Sherman the GM is gone, would McKenzie have considered staying if Ted threw him a bone the way he threw Harris a bone?

Yes maybe he would of assuming his problem was completly with Sherman. Am not so sure it was though.

McKenzies problems with Sherman were mainy two issues:

1. Sherman's seemingly refusing to talk to him or anybody for that matter

2. Hiring Kurt Schottenheimer to be DB coach instead of promoting Lionel Washington(Ironic isn't it).

[the_idle_threat]

If TT had been the Packers' GM years earlier, the Packers would have drafted Taco Wallace.

Then the Taco Wallace era would have lasted several years rather than a few short months.

Oh, to dream ...

[Patler]

I don't understand this boards infatuation with Taco Wallace. TT drafted Wallace in the 7th round of 2003 for Seattle. He hung on at Seattle on the practice squad and the regular roster a few games in 2003 and 2004. When GB needed receivers badly in 2005, TT signed a player he was well-familiar with. Nothing wrong with that in my book.

If his nickname wasn't "Taco" would he continue to be brought up? There was certainly nothing memorable, either good or bad, about his few weeks in Green Bay. There were a few other receivers that came and went quickly that season too.

[MJZiggy]

If his nickname wasn't "Taco" would he continue to be brought up?

Not a chance. You gotta love name like Taco.

[packinpatland]

If his nickname wasn't "Taco" would he continue to be brought up?

Not a chance. You gotta love name like Taco.

Good thing a guy like 'Booger' McFarland could actually play.