Green Bay Ravens?

[Scott Campbell]

............. I guess I am a sheep following the herder to greener pastures that might not exist. But that's OK because I will still enjoy the journey.

Well Mr. Sheep, well see how much you enjoy the journey if Murphy gets ahold of you.

[Scott Campbell]

Wouldn't skeptic mean he at least had some hope? I would put him down as more of a doom & gloomer waiting for the walls to collapse and the wheels to fall off.

I get the impression some of the doom and gloomers would just as soon seen the Packers self destruct just to validate their views on Ted.

[Tarlam!]

I guess I am a sheep...

Be careful what you say, we now have a Kiwi member on the forum.....

[Tarlam!]

Of course our puzzle is always changing from year to year, so the fun never ends.

OMG, that is a hysterically funny line. That almost, but not quite made it into my signature. F**k, I laughed at that!

Thanks, Wisty!

[BallHawk]

waiting for the walls to collapse and the wheels to fall off.

Sounds like your car.

[Bretsky]

Wouldn't skeptic mean he at least had some hope? I would put him down as more of a doom & gloomer waiting for the walls to collapse and the wheels to fall off.

I get the impression some of the doom and gloomers would just as soon seen the Packers self destruct just to validate their views on Ted.

TEX IS ALIVE

Exactly what I read him state over at JS for two years. I'll welcome the opportunity to win a Super Bowl and idolize Ted Thompson as I do Ron Wolf and Mike Holmgren

[cheesner]

The big thing is that so many of you have a positive opinion of the unknown. That is EQUALLY incorrect thinking.

Yet a whole lot more fun...

I'm sure I'm in the "negative" catagory, but I don't view it that way. I view it as solving a puzzle - and solving puzzles is fun. Of course our puzzle is always changing from year to year, so the fun never ends.

As for the negativity label, I think scouts and GM's have to look at team building in that way... "where is our team deficient, what needs to be fixed and rebuilt, etc. Of course, TT doesn't look at it that way, and that makes for some very interesting arguments for us - and that's fun too!!!!

TT looks at it as:
'where is our team deficient, what needs to be fixed and rebuilt, etc. that will make us a better team this year and into the future.'

Do you really think TT does not want to improve the team? I think this pushes you beyond "negative" or "doom and gloom" and into some new territory of "obssesively pessimistic paranoia".

[wist43]

I think TT sticks to his board w/o regard to the state of the roster... he's said as much.

His philosphy is that you always take the BPA regardless of position, and then, after 8 billion years, BPA eventually meets up with need. Given that the team is going to take a major step back when Rodgers takes over, when does TT get the roster fleshed out, and have all the pieces in place???

Let's assume a best case scenario, i.e. that Rodgers can play, even if he can play it's going to take him 2-3 years to get it figured out - at least to the point where he could reasonably lead a playoff run.

So, 2-3 years down the line: 5 major players on the team will likely be done, or nearly done - Driver, Clifton, Tauscher, Harris, and Woodson. Also, Kampman's contract will be up, and Hawk, Harrell, Collins, Colledge, and Spitz will all be close to FA.

So he spends his cap money to "keep our own", and he still has to replace all of those other major pieces. Throw on top of all of those "needs", the already existing holes at TE, WR, and RB... If he doesn't address "need" at any point, how does he ever get the roster caught up???

I'm not an advocate of reaching to fill a need (Jamal Reynolds was just a stupid pick). I am an advocate of moving up and down the draft board to find good players that fill needs, however. Also, the use of draft picks in trading for current NFL players, i.e. Turner, etc...

It's reasonable to always be looking at the long term, but the NFL is a 4-5 year cycle league; this is TT's 3rd offseason and I don't see any hope of us being in position to make a playoff run w/in another 2-3 years. TT isn't taking the long view/approach, he's taking the longest view/approach. I'm not that patient.

[Scott Campbell]

I think TT sticks to his board w/o regard to the state of the roster... he's said as much.

His philosphy is that you always take the BPA regardless of position, and then, after 8 billion years, BPA eventually meets up with need.

I'm not sure how you can stick with that conclusion after this last draft. Our greatest area of need was at RB. Ted drafted 2. Once Lynch was off the board, there weren't any RB's left worthy of the 16th pick. So he picked Harrell in the first, and then addressed our greatest area of need with the very next pick.

Review the draft picks again, and match their positions up with our greatest areas of need. There is plenty of alignment with need if you're looking for it, even if you don't want to admit that taking a DT with our #1 was a good idea.

In conclusion, I maintain that it didn't take 8 billion years.

[wist43]

I think TT sticks to his board w/o regard to the state of the roster... he's said as much.

His philosphy is that you always take the BPA regardless of position, and then, after 8 billion years, BPA eventually meets up with need.

I'm not sure how you can stick with that conclusion after this last draft. Our greatest area of need was at RB. Ted drafted 2. Once Lynch was off the board, there weren't any RB's left worthy of the 16th pick. So he picked Harrell in the first, and then addressed our greatest area of need with the very next pick.

Review the draft picks again, and match their positions up with our greatest areas of need. There is plenty of alignment with need if you're looking for it, even if you don't want to admit that taking a DT with our #1 was a good idea.

In conclusion, I maintain that it didn't take 8 billion years.

It's one thing to draft a guy at a position of need... but, if he's "just a guy" you really haven't done anything to improve the team, or eliminate the need. What I'm talking about is difference makers, or potential difference makers.

I do have hope that Jackson will be the starter in short order, but would much rather have Turner or Lynch. Jones on the other hand, is "just a guy", IMO, and really doesn't address the need at WR - no, I didn't want Moss. Jones may turn into a decent #3 at some point in his career, maybe even a #2; but, he's certainly not going to be a playmaker that is going to change GB's fortunes at WR.

If TT is just going to settle for who's sitting there when he picks, always take his BPA regardless of position, not be very active in FA, and isn't going to be creative in going after quality players at positions of need, I don't think he'll ever get the roster positioned to win a championship.

[cheesner]

I think TT sticks to his board w/o regard to the state of the roster... he's said as much.

His philosphy is that you always take the BPA regardless of position, and then, after 8 billion years, BPA eventually meets up with need. Given that the team is going to take a major step back when Rodgers takes over, when does TT get the roster fleshed out, and have all the pieces in place???

Let's assume a best case scenario, i.e. that Rodgers can play, even if he can play it's going to take him 2-3 years to get it figured out - at least to the point where he could reasonably lead a playoff run.

So, 2-3 years down the line: 5 major players on the team will likely be done, or nearly done - Driver, Clifton, Tauscher, Harris, and Woodson. Also, Kampman's contract will be up, and Hawk, Harrell, Collins, Colledge, and Spitz will all be close to FA.

So he spends his cap money to "keep our own", and he still has to replace all of those other major pieces. Throw on top of all of those "needs", the already existing holes at TE, WR, and RB... If he doesn't address "need" at any point, how does he ever get the roster caught up???

I'm not an advocate of reaching to fill a need (Jamal Reynolds was just a stupid pick). I am an advocate of moving up and down the draft board to find good players that fill needs, however. Also, the use of draft picks in trading for current NFL players, i.e. Turner, etc...

It's reasonable to always be looking at the long term, but the NFL is a 4-5 year cycle league; this is TT's 3rd offseason and I don't see any hope of us being in position to make a playoff run w/in another 2-3 years. TT isn't taking the long view/approach, he's taking the longest view/approach. I'm not that patient.

In 2-3 years we will have another 20-30 draft picks to choose from. We will also have some sizable cap room in which to sign the 5 players you mention. If we continue to get 6 good players every 2 drafts (I added Rodgers) that will give us 12 more good players. That is a lot of good players for one team. Throw in Kampman and Wells, and 2-3 more impact FAs (I expect Woodson and Picket to be on the downside at that point) and we could be very formidable. Yes, it hinges on Rodgers, but that is the nature of QBs. You never know for sure who is going to work out.

As far as building to win now, there is just too much risk involved in bringing in FAs. It is possible, but the Packers have too many wholes to fill. I think they could have become a good playoff team, but not superbowl competitive. That just isn't good enough in my mind.

[cheesner]

It's one thing to draft a guy at a position of need... but, if he's "just a guy" you really haven't done anything to improve the team, or eliminate the need. What I'm talking about is difference makers, or potential difference makers.

I do have hope that Jackson will be the starter in short order, but would much rather have Turner or Lynch. Jones on the other hand, is "just a guy", IMO, and really doesn't address the need at WR - no, I didn't want Moss. Jones may turn into a decent #3 at some point in his career, maybe even a #2; but, he's certainly not going to be a playmaker that is going to change GB's fortunes at WR.

Where will our playmakers come from? Who were our last playmakers? Favre, Driver, Green, Levens, Freeman, Brooks, and Chumura. All these players have a few things in common. None were 1st round picks (2nd, 7th, 3rd, 5th, 3rd, 3rd, 6th IIRC). Only Favre began playing in his second year, the rest road the pine for a few years and developed.

Playmakers do not need to come from high 1st round selections. We have some talented youngsters who may very well develop into playmakers.

[Tarlam!]

I think what Wisty says makes a heck of a lot of sense, but, being of the Kool Aide disposition, I agree to disagree.

It is all very plausible; Wisty says, go get the player who is BPA at a need position via trade to accelerate the process.

The flaw, here, is that Shermy showed us exactly how that can backfire, by being a poor judge of player.

TT is attempting to demonstrate how to build a championship team by being a GOOD judge of player, sitting tight in drafts, believing in your boards and not overpaying for FA.

As far as the window is concerned, TT has proven he is a cap master. I hav no doubt that he will continue to lock down our own before they become FA's.

Where I really agree is that 5 players are heading into the home stretch. Again, TT is gambling on players like Barbre to come along.

Both Wisty's and TT's methods have flaws, but both have a good chance of working. What I like about TT's method is it seems to be relatively objective.

[wist43]

I'm aware of the upside arguments, and I have hope for guys like Wynn, Jolly, Blackmon, Underwood, et al... and, I agree that whether Rodgers turns out or not is an unknown that is simply the nature of the beast.

I have no problem with the quantitiy over quality approach early in the rebuilding process; but, there is a time and place for everything. If we do have another 20-30 draft picks in the next 2-3 years, all TT will be doing is repeatedly turning over the bottom of the roster.

You need stars to win... will TT go balls to the wall to acquire those 2-3 players that will get us over the top??? I doubt it.

Would we have won the SB w/o Reggie White??? Of course not. Would we have won the SB w/o Brett Favre??? Of course not. Would TT have gone after either??? Of course not.

[MJZiggy]

I'm aware of the upside arguments, and I have hope for guys like Wynn, Jolly, Blackmon, Underwood, et al... and, I agree that whether Rodgers turns out or not is an unknown that is simply the nature of the beast.

I have no problem with the quantitiy over quality approach early in the rebuilding process; but, there is a time and place for everything. If we do have another 20-30 draft picks in the next 2-3 years, all TT will be doing is repeatedly turning over the bottom of the roster.

You need stars to win... will TT go balls to the wall to acquire those 2-3 players that will get us over the top??? I doubt it.

Would we have won the SB w/o Reggie White??? Of course not. Would we have won the SB w/o Brett Favre??? Of course not. Would TT have gone after either??? Of course not.

You know that logic is flawed, because when Wolf brought TT on board he asked him to evaluate a player and decide if they should go after him. He got the job because he decided that, yes, Brett Favre was a player to pursue. So of course he would have. Just because he hasn't doesn't mean he necessarily won't.