Moss gets us to the SuperBowl???

[PackerBlues]

I dont think people here are listening to what is actually concerning a lot of fellow Packer fans here.

Its not that I or anyone else really expected Moss to be the one great free agent aquisition that would take us to the Super Bowl, that is just ridiculous. What I myself think, and I am sure many other Packer fans would agree on, is the simple fact that our Offense was pathetic last year. Randy Moss would have simply have been a proven veteren, a proven weapon on offense. Thats it, thats all.

Would Moss have came back as the same player that burned us all those times in the past? None of us know for sure, but I would bet that we would have had a clear idea by the end of training camp. There are ways to manage a contract so that a guy could be cut before the start of the season if he does not add to the team in the way that you desire. I think that most Packer fans agree with Favre when he said it was a risk worth taking.

That being said, we may never know exactly what the finer details of the actual trade were or how we "missed out" on getting Moss. It really does not matter anymore, because Moss is in Ne, not in GB.

The other thing that seems to get quite a few Packer fans riled up would be our lack of action in Free Agency. Again, anybody can argue about how much any one player may or may not make an impact on our team. But none of you can tell me or any other Packer fan out there that we do not need help on Offense. WE do need help on offense, and other than the draft, Free Agency is the best way to get that help. Many other winning teams use free agency........so why not the GreenBay Packers?

I could look up the stats showing how pathetic our offense was last year. I could post those stats. But there is no need to rehash what we already know. Our offense could not score in the red zone last year. As Favre said, if not for our Defense, we would not have won 8 games last year. That is the truth, and it is a fact. No argument.

Were there players in Free Agency that could have helped this team improve more than a rookie taken in the draft? Without a doubt yes. Again there are some that would argue that the cost for some of these players was to much, and again, I could get on the internet and browse through all the free agent signings this off season to point out guys that could have been brought in. Again, it does not matter anymore, because nobody is left that was worth signing, and its just that simple......no longer worth an argument of any kind.

Where does all of this leave us now? I guess we just have to hope the rookies can step up, or hope that there will be some viable talent cut by other teams before the season starts. I dont think anyone can blame Favre for being frustrated when faced with those two options for offensive improvement. He wants to win now, and who can honestly blame him for that?

[Cheesehead Craig]

Fantastic post. Well made points all around.

I believe it was Bretsky that said it best when he said that TT wants to win, just that doing it his way is the most important thing verus what others percieve he needs to do to win now.

We have no choice but to accept this philosophy by TT is the way things are being done, regardless of the frustration aspect it gives us. I too wish he would have done more in FA, but that window is gone for now. Like you said, we have to hope the rookies pan out and step up. It's harder to do that than go with the known FA and what he can bring.

I feel your pain man.

[pbmax]

The fact that Moss, or any other free agent would not have put us over the top argues that signing free agents is not the way to go currently.

You get better value and longer contracts with the draft picks and a better chance to turn over the roster looking for better people. FAs slow that process down beacuse younger players are not asked to play and not all of them will take front loaded year by year contracts, so cutting them leads to dead cap money.

Its definitely a longer road, but if we aren't 1-2 or 3 players away, why aim for middle of the road with mediocre, non-impact free agents?

[Patler]

I believe it was Bretsky that said it best when he said that TT wants to win, just that doing it his way is the most important thing verus what others percieve he needs to do to win now.

Would you really want your GM not to have the confidence in his own plan?
Right or wrong, I prefer that he does it his way rather than conceding to the masses or flapping in the wind of current opinion. The players, coaches and administration know the philosophy and can work toward supporting it to maximize its effectiveness. I prefer that to working with or for someone who has no clear direction.

At least this way he can be judged on his performance. At some point in the not too distant future the Packers can judge if the TT approach will work for a 10-15 year run or not. It will come to rest on him, as it should.

[pbmax]

I believe it was Bretsky that said it best when he said that TT wants to win, just that doing it his way is the most important thing verus what others percieve he needs to do to win now.

Would you really want your GM not to have the confidence in his own plan?
Right or wrong, I prefer that he does it his way rather than conceding to the masses or flapping in the wind of current opinion. The players, coaches and administration know the philosophy and can work toward supporting it to maximize its effectiveness. I prefer that to working with or for someone who has no clear direction.

At least this way he can be judged on his performance. At some point in the not too distant future the Packers can judge if the TT approach will work for a 10-15 year run or not. It will come to rest on him, as it should.

[cpk1994]

seconded

[Cheesehead Craig]

I believe it was Bretsky that said it best when he said that TT wants to win, just that doing it his way is the most important thing verus what others percieve he needs to do to win now.

Would you really want your GM not to have the confidence in his own plan?
Right or wrong, I prefer that he does it his way rather than conceding to the masses or flapping in the wind of current opinion. The players, coaches and administration know the philosophy and can work toward supporting it to maximize its effectiveness. I prefer that to working with or for someone who has no clear direction.

At least this way he can be judged on his performance. At some point in the not too distant future the Packers can judge if the TT approach will work for a 10-15 year run or not. It will come to rest on him, as it should.

Certainly I agree Patler. He just has a different style than most other GM's that it does take getting some used to. I came to accept his style after last year's offseason. I like it overall, but it can be frustrating.

[PackerBlues]

In the meantime, we get to read articles about how the Packers need to spend "X" amount of money on players salaries. We do seem to have a large amout of cap room now. That seemed to be why Thompson cut all of the veterans that he cut........and yet we seem to be sitting on that cap room.

I dont question Thompsons confidence in his "plan". I question the comments he has made over and over again about how he is all about helping the team win now rather than a year from now.

[Scott Campbell]

I believe it was Bretsky that said it best when he said that TT wants to win, just that doing it his way is the most important thing verus what others percieve he needs to do to win now.

Would you really want your GM not to have the confidence in his own plan?
Right or wrong, I prefer that he does it his way rather than conceding to the masses or flapping in the wind of current opinion. The players, coaches and administration know the philosophy and can work toward supporting it to maximize its effectiveness. I prefer that to working with or for someone who has no clear direction.

At least this way he can be judged on his performance. At some point in the not too distant future the Packers can judge if the TT approach will work for a 10-15 year run or not. It will come to rest on him, as it should.

[Packnut]

FA

The fact that Moss, or any other free agent would not have put us over the top argues that signing free agents is not the way to go currently.

You get better value and longer contracts with the draft picks and a better chance to turn over the roster looking for better people. FAs slow that process down beacuse younger players are not asked to play and not all of them will take front loaded year by year contracts, so cutting them leads to dead cap money.

Its definitely a longer road, but if we aren't 1-2 or 3 players away, why aim for middle of the road with mediocre, non-impact free agents?

That's assuming you make a mistake signing the wrong FA. How would our DB situation played out last year had Woodson not been signed? Woodson was a heckuva signing by Thompson. In fact, I believe Woodson turned out to be one of the top 5 production guys signed last season.

There are plenty of examples of FA's who turn out to be great moves. Without Brees, the Saints are still just an after-thought. Now before you say it, yes there are plenty of moves that turn out bad. But where we differ is I believe that's part of what a GM gets paid for-to make the right FA signings. Now if a GM is afraid to make a move cause he'll get burned, he should'nt be the GM.

Also, the reason you sign FA's is to solidify a position so that it is no longer a position of need which in turn allows you to concentrate efforts such as the draft on other areas of need. It also speed's up the process by getting a proven player with experience as oppossed to the 2-3 year learning period for a draft choice.

Like I stated before, free agency is a tool, nothing more and like any tool it is as good or bad as the person using it............

[Merlin]

Re: FA

The fact that Moss, or any other free agent would not have put us over the top argues that signing free agents is not the way to go currently.

You get better value and longer contracts with the draft picks and a better chance to turn over the roster looking for better people. FAs slow that process down beacuse younger players are not asked to play and not all of them will take front loaded year by year contracts, so cutting them leads to dead cap money.

Its definitely a longer road, but if we aren't 1-2 or 3 players away, why aim for middle of the road with mediocre, non-impact free agents?

TT has already tried to sign less then mediocre FA's to fill in for pro-bowlers. The only flaw in the "younger player" logic is if they do amount to anything, all of their contracts will be up around the same time and you won't be able to afford them all. The other flaw with "younger is better" is that without veteran leadership, who the hell are they going to learn from? DD is a hell of a WR, but he has a job to do and it isn't coaching the other 37 WR's on the roster.

[Bretsky]

Re: FA

The fact that Moss, or any other free agent would not have put us over the top argues that signing free agents is not the way to go currently.

You get better value and longer contracts with the draft picks and a better chance to turn over the roster looking for better people. FAs slow that process down beacuse younger players are not asked to play and not all of them will take front loaded year by year contracts, so cutting them leads to dead cap money.

Its definitely a longer road, but if we aren't 1-2 or 3 players away, why aim for middle of the road with mediocre, non-impact free agents?

That's assuming you make a mistake signing the wrong FA. How would our DB situation played out last year had Woodson not been signed? Woodson was a heckuva signing by Thompson. In fact, I believe Woodson turned out to be one of the top 5 production guys signed last season.

There are plenty of examples of FA's who turn out to be great moves. Without Brees, the Saints are still just an after-thought. Now before you say it, yes there are plenty of moves that turn out bad. But where we differ is I believe that's part of what a GM gets paid for-to make the right FA signings. Now if a GM is afraid to make a move cause he'll get burned, he should'nt be the GM.

Also, the reason you sign FA's is to solidify a position so that it is no longer a position of need which in turn allows you to concentrate efforts such as the draft on other areas of need. It also speed's up the process by getting a proven player with experience as oppossed to the 2-3 year learning period for a draft choice.

Like I stated before, free agency is a tool, nothing more and like any tool it is as good or bad as the person using it............

[Patler]

OOPS! Wrong thread!

[Scott Campbell]

Re: FA

That's assuming you make a mistake signing the wrong FA. How would our DB situation played out last year had Woodson not been signed? Woodson was a heckuva signing by Thompson. In fact, I believe Woodson turned out to be one of the top 5 production guys signed last season.

There are plenty of examples of FA's who turn out to be great moves. Without Brees, the Saints are still just an after-thought. Now before you say it, yes there are plenty of moves that turn out bad. But where we differ is I believe that's part of what a GM gets paid for-to make the right FA signings. Now if a GM is afraid to make a move cause he'll get burned, he should'nt be the GM.

Also, the reason you sign FA's is to solidify a position so that it is no longer a position of need which in turn allows you to concentrate efforts such as the draft on other areas of need. It also speed's up the process by getting a proven player with experience as oppossed to the 2-3 year learning period for a draft choice.

Like I stated before, free agency is a tool, nothing more and like any tool it is as good or bad as the person using it............

I actually agree with this completely. Never thought I'd be saying that. And I'm almost in shock that you showed Ted a little love over the Woodson signing. I think it gives you an air of objectivity that I hadn't noticed before.