I would consider 07 successful if GB

[The Leaper]

Things can change from one season to the next. Just look at last years Saints.

The Saints were a legitimate playoff contending team prior to 2005...but they played in one of the toughest divisions in football which usually hindered their chances. Then Katrina wiped out the city and turned the 2005 season into a complete debacle. Fortunately for New Orleans, the bad season did offer them the #2 pick in the draft...and then they got even luckier when Houston stupidly decided to forego a certain offensive playmaker like Bush for a combine king DE.

Green Bay wasn't a legitimate playoff team last year...in a crappy division that practically gave them 5 wins. While I expect the team to improve based on experience, the improvement isn't going to be phenominal with a rather inexperienced coaching staff. Without adding a few other key components through FA...which is part of what helped us improve last year (Woodson, Pickett)...I don't see how this team takes a big step forward in 2007.

[woodbuck27]

I'll measure success at the moment by the defense tightening up and not giving up the big or stupid plays and the offense showing improvement in the line, fewer drops and less questionable decisions. If they do that, the wins will materialize.

This is what I figured; there are only a couple TT extremists in here IMO and they will never want any meaurables to be on record so there is always a way out. I was curious about this question; the failure thread intrigues me a heck of a lot more.

My answer had nothing at all to do with TT. You wanted to know how I would measure success. Well, success is improvement and I thought of the areas that needed improvement and if the schedule is as difficult as you guys keep telling me it is, then W-L becomes less of an accurate benchmark for measuring improvement from our "pansy" schedule last year. You didn't give me the option I wanted in the failure thread.

Geeee, I thought I was the tough guy.

Many here expect alot more fr. our season than I believe is realistic.

If we go 8-8 given the SOS we have this season, then I'll consider this season a step forward.

GO PACKERS !!

[retailguy]

Things can change from one season to the next. Just look at last years Saints. The Pack could easily go 9-7 this year or better, but they could just as easity repeat an 8-8 season or do worse. I’m not a big believer that how a team finish the previous one will translate into success or failure from one season to the next. There is too much time between seasons and often a lot of personal changes (but not too much in the Packers case). I do think we will go at least 9-7 for the reason that all of the teams young players, which consisted of about 50% of the team, now has 1-2 years under their belt. Throw in some success from one or two players from this year’s rookie class, perhaps Harrell or Jackson, and we have a continuing improving team.

Sure, plenty of things can change from one season to the next. Problem - Green Bay is planning almost ENTIRELY on changes from within or draft choices. New Orleans is a very bad example of your point. They went out and got a bunch of guys in free agency last year. Some stepped up, some didn't. Some probably created competition which spurred those already in New Orleans to get better. You can't ignore the chaos that Katrina created there either, the 2005 squad largely underachieved because of the chaotic situation. My point is - many different types of change, coupled with an entirely new coaching staff and a new philosophy. They didn't just "count on" changes from within the organization.

It will be interesting to see how much, or if, this team improves. My point was related to "playoff ready", and I think the 2006 season is fairly representative of the "health" of this franchise. Yes, we won 8 games, but, equally yes, we beat one team with a winning record, and three teams from outside the NFC North. That's also true, and is frequently being overlooked/ignored in these rooms.

[CaptainKickass]

There is only one successful team in the NFL every year.

Everyone else is a loser.

[oregonpackfan]

I'll measure success at the moment by the defense tightening up and not giving up the big or stupid plays and the offense showing improvement in the line, fewer drops and less questionable decisions. If they do that, the wins will materialize.

Here, here! Well put, MJZiggy!

[oregonpackfan]

I think 9 and 7 is doable.

As long as two of those 9 include the Bears.

Packinpackland,

Don't forget the @$&*! Vikings!

I want the Packers to beat them twice again this year.

[packinpatland]

I think 9 and 7 is doable.

As long as two of those 9 include the Bears.

Packinpackland,

Don't forget the @$&*! Vikings!

I want the Packers to beat them twice again this year.

Only 5 more to account for.

[The Shadow]

I would consider 007 successful in Green Bay if he marries Ms. Moneypenny at Lambeau during halftime of the Bear's game.

[Joemailman]

Shadow,

On this forum, 007 is not a he.

[Bretsky]

I'll measure success at the moment by the defense tightening up and not giving up the big or stupid plays and the offense showing improvement in the line, fewer drops and less questionable decisions. If they do that, the wins will materialize.

This is what I figured; there are only a couple TT extremists in here IMO and they will never want any meaurables to be on record so there is always a way out. I was curious about this question; the failure thread intrigues me a heck of a lot more.

My answer had nothing at all to do with TT. You wanted to know how I would measure success. Well, success is improvement and I thought of the areas that needed improvement and if the schedule is as difficult as you guys keep telling me it is, then W-L becomes less of an accurate benchmark for measuring improvement from our "pansy" schedule last year. You didn't give me the option I wanted in the failure thread.

Great politician; say nothing bold so there is nothing to debate about.

Who cares about weakness or strength of schedule; take your own view and modify if you agree or do not. I think it's fair to measure a team, or TT, by their win and loss record. Maybe your expectations for success is incredibly low (6 wins for instance if you think last year's record was a mirage due to schedule) ; but I'd get a kick out of seeing something, anything, specific that is measurable.

[Bretsky]

One more thing; right or wrong I'm consistent.

Green Bay had $25,000 of cap space to work with this year; TT decided how to utilize that

Green Bay was .500 last year.

Worthy or not we were near a .500 squad and I think it's very practical to say that GB needs to make the playoffs for a success

And if GB does not make the playoffs it was a failure.

And TT is in charge of putting this personnell together as well as the staff so IMO you can attach his label for Green Bay if you choose.

I would not want to be accused of not stating my view when I am trying to get others to as well.


Cheers,
B

[The Shadow]

Shadow,

On this forum, 007 is not a he.

007, you can never be anything LESS than a rousing success, a delight, an exalted , angelic being, and a ray of sunshine on this forum.
Therefore, I assumed that it was a lesser personage.
Please accept my humble apology......

[GrnBay007]

Please accept my humble apology......

Welllll...

Hmmm...

OK

:P

The angelic part really worked.

[The Shadow]

Please accept my humble apology......

Welllll...

Hmmm...

OK

:P

The angelic part really worked.

I usually hook that up with "part angelic innocent, part seductive temptress"; I've gotten some mileage with that over the years.

[Bretsky]

Note:

Early results indicate over 2 out of three PR required Green Bay to improve their 2006 record for the season to be a success