From one extreme at GM to the other.

[GrnBay007]

I wonder if Mike Sherman realizes/appreciates how much attention he still gets from the Packer Nation?

I bet he misses the hell out of Green Bay and I bet he wishes TT the worst.

...maybe like the g/f or b/f that left you.....maybe time to move on? ? ? :P

[MJZiggy]

I think we're long past time to move on. How long has it been since M2 was GM?

[Scott Campbell]

How long has it been since M2 was GM?

Not nearly long enough.

:P

[prsnfoto]

Re: From one extreme at GM to the other.

I am not saying either of these guys are the perfect GM.

Your entire post states that you believe that Sherman was the perfect one and TT is completely useless.

No he didn't he pointed out his flaws reaching in the draft and signing guys like Johnson that were a mistake, and overpaying his own FA's, again TT tunnel vision you only read what you wanted to read.

[4and12to12and4]

Re: From one extreme at GM to the other.

The teams Sherman put on the field had you expecting wins. The teams Thompson put on the field make you lose your lunch.

Well, then, the Texans fans we're pretty disappointed last year, if that is what they "expected".

I always look to my Offensive Line/ Assistant Head Coach for the "predictor" of victories... which is the position he held the last time ANYONE could anticipate wins.

He now controls the OFFENSE. He doesn't control the team... He doesn't draft the players.... He doesn't forecast wins.... He probably doesn't have final say on anything...

Shermans teams DID win in GB. Give it a rest, OK? We know you hated him, he's gone... Really. He's gone.
The new sheriff is in town. He's 12-20, and on the brink of greatness, depending on which brand of "reality" you choose.

We shall see.

Don't attack me as if I hated Sherman. I liked Sherman and was shocked when he was fired. You took one statement I made rebutting a ridiculous comparison that was made about how bad TT is, so I was simply defending TT. I'm not a Sherman hater, and never was. I was sad to see him go. So, before you label me, get your facts straight.

I broke down the entire post that bashed TT just to show that it was a ridiculous, biased post. That's all. I wish Sherman all the luck, and hope he succeeds. I'm not one of those here who thinks he singlehandedly destroyed the franchise. He obviously had a good stretch with us. But, the poster said that Sherman's teams EXPECT to win, so I reminded him of the Texans season last year. nuff said.

[prsnfoto]

Re: From one extreme at GM to the other.

The teams Sherman put on the field had you expecting wins. The teams Thompson put on the field make you lose your lunch.

Well, then, the Texans fans we're pretty disappointed last year, if that is what they "expected".


You lost all respect with these two boneheaded comments, news flash Sherman was not the coach when Reggie played and your lover has the same QB Shermy had. Second he was the Oline coach for Texas you can blame him for Carr not knowing what state he is in but the franchises losing record is a far stretch. I am by no means a Sherman lover, but he tried to win now, not in the next decade, it can be argued he failed, I think he did but he put a better product on the field than TT, even though it was headed for a train wreck. TT has proven he can draft better and manage a cap better that is all, it remains to be seen if he can produce a winner, the odds are against him since one of your above mentioned Sherman saviors is leaving soon. I actually believe like the original poster who has been attacked like I have been the answer lies in between.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Re: From one extreme at GM to the other.

I am not saying either of these guys are the perfect GM.

Your entire post states that you believe that Sherman was the perfect one and TT is completely useless.

No he didn't he pointed out his flaws reaching in the draft and signing guys like Johnson that were a mistake, and overpaying his own FA's, again TT tunnel vision you only read what you wanted to read.

#1 - I don't have TT tunnel vision. I have never said he is a great GM, please point out where I have; otherwise, quit categorizing me as a TT apologist. I am not, nor will I be. I shall praise him for his good moves and criticize his poor ones.

#2 - His post made absolutely no reference to any flaws of Sherman. None. He never once mentioned Johnson, nor did he ever comment on reaches in the draft. You did in your response. His post was a complete bashing of TT and praising of Sherman and not acknowledging Sherman's flaws nor TT's successes. Then in the end, he says that neither is the perfect GM. The title and the conclusion of his argument are in complete disagreement with the body of his article. I simply pointed this out.

He had a good idea here and had he put more objectivity into what he was writing, it would have been a very good article. Instead, he just went for the flame angle to rile people up.

I read what was there, you added other facts which were not in the post to come up with your opinion of the article. Then you used those additional facts to generalize my feelings on TT. I went after the article, you went after me personally. Take your labeling of me and shove it.

[PackerBlues]

Re: From one extreme at GM to the other.

#2 - His post made absolutely no reference to any flaws of Sherman. None. He never once mentioned Johnson, nor did he ever comment on reaches in the draft. You did in your response. His post was a complete bashing of TT and praising of Sherman and not acknowledging Sherman's flaws nor TT's successes. Then in the end, he says that neither is the perfect GM. The title and the conclusion of his argument are in complete disagreement with the body of his article. I simply pointed this out.

I read what was there, you added other facts which were not in the post to come up with your opinion of the article. Then you used those additional facts to generalize my feelings on TT. I went after the article, you went after me personally. Take your labeling of me and shove it.

No, I think this is just one more case of someone looking for an argument. You could have just as easily looked for other ways that Sherman and Teddy were different. instead you looked at my post as a personal attack on yourself........through your beloved TT.

Sherman would reach for any free agent help he could get. The bigger the name, the more he went after the guy.

Sherman took chances in the draft to pick up a player at a position we needed.

I dont think Shermans record on free agent pick ups was all that great.

And plenty of you guys that hang off TT's nuts are quick to point out that drafting a player for need is the wrong way to draft. So wouldnt the "above mentioned point" be an example of one of Shermans "flaws"?


I also stated that I didnt think that either GM was perfect, and that in my opinion, we could use someone with values somewhere in the middle. You went straight into attack mode anyway as if I had attacked you personally.

The title of the thread was "from one extreme at GM to the other" NOT "Sherman was a better GM than TT". Try pulling your head out of Thompsons ass before you go into attack mode.

[prsnfoto]

Re: From one extreme at GM to the other.

I am not saying either of these guys are the perfect GM.

Your entire post states that you believe that Sherman was the perfect one and TT is completely useless.

No he didn't he pointed out his flaws reaching in the draft and signing guys like Johnson that were a mistake, and overpaying his own FA's, again TT tunnel vision you only read what you wanted to read.

#1 - I don't have TT tunnel vision. I have never said he is a great GM, please point out where I have; otherwise, quit categorizing me as a TT apologist. I am not, nor will I be. I shall praise him for his good moves and criticize his poor ones.

#2 - His post made absolutely no reference to any flaws of Sherman. None. He never once mentioned Johnson, nor did he ever comment on reaches in the draft. You did in your response. His post was a complete bashing of TT and praising of Sherman and not acknowledging Sherman's flaws nor TT's successes. Then in the end, he says that neither is the perfect GM. The title and the conclusion of his argument are in complete disagreement with the body of his article. I simply pointed this out.

He had a good idea here and had he put more objectivity into what he was writing, it would have been a very good article. Instead, he just went for the flame angle to rile people up.

I read what was there, you added other facts which were not in the post to come up with your opinion of the article. Then you used those additional facts to generalize my feelings on TT. I went after the article, you went after me personally. Take your labeling of me and shove it.

Sherman would reach for any free agent help he could get. The bigger the name, the more he went after the guy. The more we needed a position filled, the harder Sherman tried to fill it with a veteran player he thought could help the team win.



THIS WOULD BE THE REFERENCE TO PLAYERS LIKE JOHNSON>

Its not that Thompson does not like free agents, he just doesnt like veteran free agents. He seems to prefer guys that he "discovers".

THIS IS SOMEWHAT HARSH, WOOSEN and Pickett were legit.


Sherman was very into the idea of cohesion and keeping the team together as well as he could. If his salary cap situation dictated that he free up some cap space, he would come right out and tell people "this is the situation that we are in, and this is what we can do".


THIS REFERS TO OVERPAYING FOR HIS OWN GUYS.

Ted came here as a head hunter. Bound and determined to "fix things". He chopped as many large salaries as he could as quickly as he could, regardless of the talent, positional need, or free space already on our cap room.

THIS REFERS TO WAHLE, RIVERA, SHARPER, true however it should be noted TT has structured good deals with Kampman,Driver,Harris,Wells,Jenkins and Barnett so he is not against resigning talent in fact almost all that talent belongs to Sherman's era.

Sherman took chances in the draft to pick up a player at a position we needed. Thompson could care less about what the Packers need in the draft. He only drafts "the best player available".


TAKING NEEDS IS REACHING IN THE DRAFT I AGREE WITH TT HERE. Though i would think if player A is real close to player B and B is a need I would take him.

Sherman paid attention to team history, not just the history of Lambeau, but also the history of the Players he put on the field. Thompson hates anything that came B.T. (Before Ted) If you are not a player that Ted put on the team.....get ready for the Dagger in the back, because it doesnt matter what you have done for the Packers or who you are, you will be gone.

THIS PART IS RUBBISH.

Shermans teams had winning records.......Thompsons teams have not.

NO DISPUTING THIS.

The teams Sherman put on the field had you expecting wins. The teams Thompson put on the field make you lose your lunch.

Hind sight is 20-20 for everyone except the blind. Thompson has been here long enough to make comparisons. I am not saying either of these guys are the perfect GM. I think they are extreme opposites of one another, and we could actually use a GM somewhere in the middle.


I APOLIGIZE FOR LABELING YOU A TT LOVER, i just found the majority of this post accurate.

[Fritz]

The Packers started going to hell when Vince Lombardi was given more control over the draft in the mid-60's. I blame him.

[Scott Campbell]

This thread blows.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Re: From one extreme at GM to the other.

#2 - His post made absolutely no reference to any flaws of Sherman. None. He never once mentioned Johnson, nor did he ever comment on reaches in the draft. You did in your response. His post was a complete bashing of TT and praising of Sherman and not acknowledging Sherman's flaws nor TT's successes. Then in the end, he says that neither is the perfect GM. The title and the conclusion of his argument are in complete disagreement with the body of his article. I simply pointed this out.

I read what was there, you added other facts which were not in the post to come up with your opinion of the article. Then you used those additional facts to generalize my feelings on TT. I went after the article, you went after me personally. Take your labeling of me and shove it.

No, I think this is just one more case of someone looking for an argument. You could have just as easily looked for other ways that Sherman and Teddy were different. instead you looked at my post as a personal attack on yourself........through your beloved TT.

Sherman would reach for any free agent help he could get. The bigger the name, the more he went after the guy.

Sherman took chances in the draft to pick up a player at a position we needed.

I dont think Shermans record on free agent pick ups was all that great.

And plenty of you guys that hang off TT's nuts are quick to point out that drafting a player for need is the wrong way to draft. So wouldnt the "above mentioned point" be an example of one of Shermans "flaws"?


I also stated that I didnt think that either GM was perfect, and that in my opinion, we could use someone with values somewhere in the middle. You went straight into attack mode anyway as if I had attacked you personally.

The title of the thread was "from one extreme at GM to the other" NOT "Sherman was a better GM than TT". Try pulling your head out of Thompsons ass before you go into attack mode.

I know you hate TT and that's fine. I personally don't care if you like the guy or not.

As I said, the title of the post had a good idea behind it and your final summation fit that, but the body and the work did not. It was too slanted towards Sherman's positives and Thompson's negatives. It needed more flushing out and I would have labeled it a very good post and congratulated you. Simply because you said "neither GM is perfect" does not erase the rest of the post.

Like I said, I'm not a TT lover, nor do I have my head up his butt. I simply pointed out the flaws in your post. I should have handled the critiquing better and I apologize for that. Let's keep it civil between us. I like you posting here.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Re: From one extreme at GM to the other.

I APOLIGIZE FOR LABELING YOU A TT LOVER, i just found the majority of this post accurate.

No problem. No harm, no foul. Let's move on on how the Bears suck then shall we?

[MJZiggy]

Re: From one extreme at GM to the other.

I APOLIGIZE FOR LABELING YOU A TT LOVER, i just found the majority of this post accurate.

No problem. No harm, no foul. Let's move on on how the Bears suck then shall we?

Well last year that could be summed up in one word: Grossman, but this year there may be more to talk about there...

[4and12to12and4]

This thread blows.

This is the most accurate statement made in the entire thread.

It is impossible for us sitting here at home to judge either Sherman or TT. So much of running a team involves players executing, and luck.

Look at the Chicago Cubs. They hire Dusty Baker, and because the starting pitching stayed healthy his first year, and they had timely hitting most of the year, he came within 5 outs of bringing them back to the World Series. Then, players (especially ace pitchers) continually were injured, and Sammy got scared after getting beamed, and sucked, and three years later, he went from god to demon. Now, Pinella comes in with Soriano, Theriot, floyd, etc. and not relying on Wood and Pryor, and they start out like shit, and are finally putting it together.

Same with Lovie Smith. He is considered as one of the best coaches in football, but he came in with a great team already built for him. So, what has he done to prove that he is the difference maker. Nothing. So much is timing, luck, and players execution and health. Half our team was injured the year Shermy lost his job. Was that his fault? None of us can REALLY know how good these coaches really are. Look at Parcells, and Holmgren, and cowher. Most teams would have fired Cowher 8 years ago, but he finally got a SB ring. Does that mean he's a great coach? What about the other decade that he didn't get them there.

I just think TT bashing is useless, and it is hard to win a Superbowl regardless of what talent you have.

Look at the Yankees, George has done everything he can to put superstars in every position, so they can get a World Series ring. They're not even playing 500 ball this year. Some would argue that it's because he goes after hitting and not pitching, but the talent on that team should be able to win consistently.

No matter what owners, GM's and coaches do, it doesn't mean shit if players don't perform, and connect with one another. So, I'm done talking about TT. I hope he can get us back to the Promised Land, but if he doesn't it's not necessarily his fault. Shit happens. The Chargers were the best team in the NFL last year, PERIOD, but, they simply had a couple of plays not go their way in their playoff loss, and they went home. Is it the coaches fault? Is it Avery's fault that the Mavericks are watching the NBA playoffs at home after a stellar season? NO. They ran into a hot team that put it all together at the right time. It's what makes sports so entertaining, everyone has a shot to win it all, and you can't bitch and complain about the coaching staff and brass every year your club doesn't bring home a trophy. The level of talent in Pro sports is so even, it's pretty much a crapshoot. Hell, teams like Dallas and Seattle came one or two plays short of winning in the playoffs. The Pack could have easily made the playoffs last year. Shit, we almost beat, and should have beat, the Saints during the season if not for a fumble and a couple of other plays during the game. I see no reason why we shouldn't be a better team this year, yet, with our schedule, we could still end up under 500, but that won't mean that we aren't improved, we simply have some real tough teams to beat this coming year. Ok, my rant is over.