Futile attempt to win now or building to win in 3-4 years?

[The Shadow]

Re: Futile attempt to win now or building to win in 3-4 year

Which would you prefer?

It's become increasingly annoying to hear everyone say that the team isn't doing enough to support Favre in his last bid to win a championship. Since when does a team have to appease their Hall-of-Fame QB on the decline?Blasphemy maybe, but this team, regardless of FA/draft signings, is a few years away from competing for a title. Why make move that have a deletrious effect on the future when winning now really isn't an option.
It's proven that great teams are built through the draft and avoiding the hype in signings free agents (i.e. Patriots).
One can only hope that this team is building for a run two years down the road that will last three seasons... with another QB at the helm.

Agree!


As for your last point about Favre not being Owed anything, well that is a matter of pure opinion. May-be if you had to sit through the number of clowns that played QB in the 70's and 80's, you'd have a much deeper admiration for Favre than you do.

I certainly did, as well as the decline in the late 60's.
I like Favre - great player.
Are his personal stats, image, and and legacies more important than the Green Bay Packers?
No.
He is a great player on a team that has been fortunate enough to have had many great players over the years.

1- [i]Brett Favre, not Wolf or Holmgren, brought this organization back from being the laughingstock of the NFL. One could argue that Favre is on the same level as Lombardi when it comes to the respect level that the football world has for them. Because of playing in the modern age, Favre has done more for this team than ANY other player in it's history.[/i]

Whoa, Sparky.
When appreciation for a great football player devolves into unabashed
Messiah worship, it casts severe cold water on the overall legitimacy of the entire agrument.
Let's be logical : no Wolf, no Favre. No Wolf, no Holmgren. No Holmgren, Favre remains the talented yet immature wildboy the Falcons gave up on.
The same 'level' as Lombardi???????????????????????????????????
What are you smoking???

There were moves Thompson could have made to give Favre one more shot that would not have sacrificed the future from re-signing Walker to signing a few medium priced, low risk FA's. With all Favre has given us, I don't believe it was to much to ask for Teddy to give Brett 1 more shot......

Favre has received enough money to keep his family super rich for many, many generations. He could walk away now (come to think of it, he could have walked away years ago) and never had to grab the lunchbucket with the rest of us.
Favre has received the fawning, adoring worship (and been absolved of each & every one of his football sins) of his Cult.
Favre has carved his place as an alltime NFL great.

Favre has not been 'cheated' regarding championships. He won one (and it should be pointed out that that single championship came when he had the most talented team in the NFL as his supporting cast!). He had a second Super Bowl within his grasp. He had a winnable Philly game that wound up lost on a panicked lameduck pass.
He's had chances. Any less than Elway? Marino?
Nope.

I want to see the Packers built the right way - for the long haul - and not to patch and plug to satisfy the Cult's demands.

[woodbuck27]

Re: What

1- Brett Favre, not Wolf or Holmgren, brought this organization back from being the laughingstock of the NFL. One could argue that Favre is on the same level as Lombardi when it comes to the respect level that the football world has for them. Because of playing in the modern age, Favre has done more for this team than ANY other player in it's history. #04 is known and respected world wide. He's the reason why ANY Packer games are shown in prime time. He is and has been the "face" of the Packers for a long long time.



I would disagree with this. Reggie White brought this franchise back, and Favre sustained what Reggie brought here.

Did'nt Reggie state that Favre was a HUGE reason he came to GB? Remember the Philly game when Brett seperated his shoulder and came back in? White said that impressed the hell out of him and made him want to play with #4. Without Favre, Reggie does'nt come to GB.

You got that fact right Packnut.

[Bretsky]

Your thread is biased in the title. How do you know a win-now approach would be futile? Loading up and going after it in a watered down NFC, it's not that far-fetched to do some real damage. I'm not advocating that approach btw.

A futile win now approach or wait 3-4 yrs. No, it doesn't just work like that. Like the draft, you just don't know what would happen.

TT's plan is the rebuild, so fine. But to simply dismiss a different approach as futile is invalid.

And I really dislike the way Favre has hogtied this team the last several years.

[mraynrand]

Re: Futile attempt to win now or building to win in 3-4 year

Management has been hogtied by Favre for the past several years, awaiting his announcement of retirement or not. What if he stays another year? A first-round pick on Rodgers would have been wasted.

I have to disagree with this point. How is it a certainty that the A rod pick is wasted, even if Favre sticks around for another year? Who knows what hs progression would be and/or will be with or without Favre? All that really matters is whether he can actually play well when his time comes. Assuming that's next year, what's the problem? Sure, he may require a year or two to get up to speed, but perhaps not. The fact that the Packers picked him suggests they were planning for the future, whenever Favre isn't around. What's that old line - The hardest time to find a QB is when you don't have one. Pehaps the Packers were trying to avoid that. perhaps it HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH FAVRE 'hogtying' them - just common sense drafting - if you have a QB rated as the best QB in the draft and he drops to you, you pick him.

And for the record, I thin TT has now buuilt up a tremendous amount of depth on the squad. That should have reprecussions on 'teams and in case of injuries. This team may only be a year away from seriously competing, even with Favre gone. Two, maybe three guys elevate their game to pro bowl level THIS year, and they might win 10 games.

[vince]

Re: Futile attempt to win now or building to win in 3-4 year

I never said Jennings sucked. I said he disappeared most of the time in the 2nd half of the season and that the jury was still out on him. As far as the o-line, try learning what maximum protection is and then get back to me. Also go back and watch how the o-line was man-handeled by the Vikes, Pats and Jets. It has "potential" just like Jennings but until "potential" translates into production on the field, it can't be used as fact.

Now you're getting the point. And yes I understand perfectly what max protect is, but thanks again for your suggestion.

The run game was ranked 23rd last season and 30th in 05. I have no idea what the hell your watching but get your facts straight. Is it that hard to go to NFL.com and look up stats? If it is to challenging, I'd be more than happy to explain how they work for you.

Thanks for the offer Packnut, but I can read the statistics just fine. I was going from memory and I cited the defensive ranking rather than the offensive rushing ranking. The fact is the Packers ranked a rather average 18th in yds. per rushing attempt in '06 and 5th in fewest sacks allowed.

The point is - regardless whether your or my opinion of that performance is "terrible", "pedestrian", "started terrible and improved as the season progressed", "average in rushing and pretty damn good in pass protection", or something else, the fact remains that those are opinions - not facts, as you wrongly asserted your opinion to be.

I guess calling me names like Nazi is suppossed to aggravate me, but in reality it speaks volumes about you. When people have little or no facts to argue with, they usually resort to name calling out of frustration. I suggest we just ignore each other as this will be my last response to you because frankly your just not worth a minute of my time......

I'm not concerned whether you're aggravated or don't care about the post. The description "fact nazi" was used (as it is commonly used) to mean "a domineering and intolerant person." In my opinion, the majority of your posts show exactly those qualities. But it is your posts that I should have referred to, not you personally. Sorry about that.

The utter hypocrisy in your post, though, is noteworthy. For you to put forth such a blatantly false appearance and insinuate that you're above calling others names is an absolute joke.

Does the name "sheep" ring a bell to you, Packnut? Go back through your posts the last few days. You'll find it. I have no doubt whatsoever that I could easily find at least 10 instances where you personally denigrated other posters here with a derogatory name or description. Let me know if you want me to go through the exercise of doing so.

And while I already understand your perceptions and motivations for the style of your posts, at least you have explicitly explained (at least in part) why you choose to throw around personal attacks the way you have to date. My intent, however, was just the opposite. It was to demonstrate to you and others that YOU are the one who didn't put forth facts, but wrongly explicitly stated that they were.

Regarding your suggestion that we avoid each others posts... Obviously, if you want to ignore my posts, that's your choice and I have no problem with that. Obviously, you have every right to defend yourself however, because when you and every other poster puts forth their assertions in this public forum, all other posters have the right to respond - and possibly challenge - those assertions. I don't get the opportunity to post as much as I'd like, but when I can, I intend to continue responding to any and all posts here, including yours.

[The Shadow]

Tempers flare!

[Bretsky]

Tempers flare!

Seems like every time the Pro or Anti TT or Win Now or Win Later threads comes up this happens

It'd be nice if we'd get some more news, but it's going to be along offseason.

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Futile attempt to win now or building to win in 3-4 year

The point is - regardless whether your or my opinion of that performance is "terrible", "pedestrian", "started terrible and improved as the season progressed", "average in rushing and pretty damn good in pass protection", or something else, the fact remains that those are opinions - not facts, as you wrongly asserted your opinion to be.

It's not just Packnut - there's alot of that goes on in here. People cite facts that support some conclusion, but then pass that conclusion off as another of the facts.

[Merlin]

My 2 cents:

I want to win EVERY YEAR, regardless of who the QB is. Favre is not holding anyone hostage, the Packers should be happy they still have a top QB (yes he still is) on their team. You don't build the team for "Favre". But on the other hand, you don't tie his one hand behind his back and say "win" (although knowing Favre he probably could).

Face it, TT's rebuilding is designed to let Favre ride off into the sunset SOONER, not later. He has been trying for 3 years to push him out with his idiotic "no offense" philosophy. We still have Shittenheimer as a coach so that should tell you how committed to winning NOW that we really are.

Rebuilding in the age of the CBA and FA doesn't take YEARS, try Year. If we are not at least in the playoffs this year, TT needs to go. Right now, I just don't see it.

[packinpatland]

My 2 cents:

I want to win EVERY YEAR, regardless of who the QB is. Favre is not holding anyone hostage, the Packers should be happy they still have a top QB (yes he still is) on their team. You don't build the team for "Favre". But on the other hand, you don't tie his one hand behind his back and say "win" (although knowing Favre he probably could).

Face it, TT's rebuilding is designed to let Favre ride off into the sunset SOONER, not later. He has been trying for 3 years to push him out with his idiotic "no offense" philosophy. We still have Shittenheimer as a coach so that should tell you how committed to winning NOW that we really are.

Rebuilding in the age of the CBA and FA doesn't take YEARS, try Year. If we are not at least in the playoffs this year, TT needs to go. Right now, I just don't see it.

Good one. Worth more than just 2 cents.

[Patler]

It's hard to say how much Favre's indecision influenced the selection of Rogers, but I have to believe that it had some influence. Favre has been threatening retirement for a long time already, perhaps causing the Packers to believe a replacement needed to be brought in ASAP. Don't forget it was widely reported that the Packers would have taken J.P. Losman in 2004 if Buffalo hadn't jumped ahead of them.

If Favre had said in 2004 - 2005 that he intended to keep playing as long as he could, perhaps (just "perhaps") the Packers would have been less likely to invest a 1st round pick on a QB. The 2005 pick could have been used on someone like Logan Mankins, A DT, a CB, etc.. Then, having tested fate another year, 2006 may have seen the Packers by pass Hawk for Cutler or Leinart, or maybe they would have stayed with Hawk, and this year would have snatched Brady Quinn, since sooner or later Favre WILL retire!.

Its hard to say what might have been. Maybe even with a commitment from Favre the packers would have thought it was to much to pass up on a QB that somehow fell to them in 2005. If they had passed on Rodgers, it's even harder to say if that would have been better, or not at this point.

[Patler]

My 2 cents:

I want to win EVERY YEAR, regardless of who the QB is. Favre is not holding anyone hostage, the Packers should be happy they still have a top QB (yes he still is) on their team. You don't build the team for "Favre". But on the other hand, you don't tie his one hand behind his back and say "win" (although knowing Favre he probably could).

Face it, TT's rebuilding is designed to let Favre ride off into the sunset SOONER, not later. He has been trying for 3 years to push him out with his idiotic "no offense" philosophy. We still have Shittenheimer as a coach so that should tell you how committed to winning NOW that we really are.

Rebuilding in the age of the CBA and FA doesn't take YEARS, try Year. If we are not at least in the playoffs this year, TT needs to go. Right now, I just don't see it.

So Favre only wants to play if he has all the offensive tools even if it comes at the expense of the defense? Apparently you think Favre wouldn't want to play on a team with a lights out defense and a weak offense.

I don't think you are giving Favre or most professional athletes enough credit. Especially Favre, who I think would be very content to win the Super Bowl even if the offense averages only 15 points a game and he throws for 10 TDs the entire year.

Your argument presumes Favre enjoys playing only if the offense is dominant. I don't think that is true.

[packinpatland]

Re: Futile attempt to win now or building to win in 3-4 year

Which would you prefer?

It's become increasingly annoying to hear everyone say that the team isn't doing enough to support Favre in his last bid to win a championship. Since when does a team have to appease their Hall-of-Fame QB on the decline?Blasphemy maybe, but this team, regardless of FA/draft signings, is a few years away from competing for a title. Why make move that have a deletrious effect on the future when winning now really isn't an option.

Management has been hogtied by Favre for the past several years, awaiting his announcement of retirement or not. What if he stays another year? A first-round pick on Rodgers would have been wasted.

That said, I don't blame them at all for not loading up on overpriced FA talent just to give it one last run with Favre. Two Pro-Bowl FA signings wouldn't make this a 11-5 team I don't think.

It's proven that great teams are built through the draft and avoiding the hype in signings free agents (i.e. Patriots).

One can only hope that this team is building for a run two years down the road that will last three seasons... with another QB at the helm.

It isn't about Favre. It's about the Packers. It's about a GM that should have been more 'Bellicheck-like' and beefed up the offense's key positions.

[packinpatland]

So basically... can't win now... or next year... or the year after that... or the year after that...

2012, watch out!

Gotta love a good cynic.

[Patler]

He has been trying for 3 years to push him out with his idiotic "no offense" philosophy.

"No offense" approach? On just the first days of the three drafts he has conducted, TT has drafted:

1 QB
3 wide receivers
1 runningback
2 guards

Thats seven offensive players in 9 rounds.

During those same 9 rounds (the first three each year) he drafted only 5 defensive players. So where has the primary emphasis been, offense or defense?

In addition he signed his own FA TE, who was a former Pro_bowler and signed two former first round draft picks in Gardner and Robinson.

To say TT has ignored the offense is just plain wrong, in my opinion.