Something Realistic: Grade the 2003 Packer draft

[MJZiggy]

[quote="Anti-Polar Bear"]

Wonder why Sherman never had much money to spend...Hmmm.

Two Words: Ron Wolf.

Wolf handed out large contacts to Doresy Levens and Antonio Freeman. Levens wouldve been great if not for injuries; no regret because Levens downfall gave raise to Ahman's supremacy, much like Majak's injury introduced BF to the world. Freeman some how lost his quickness after signing the extension.

Imagine the effect a previous GM can have on the team after he's gone...

You fail to see that Wolf left Sherman less money than Sherman left Thompson. Using this logic, then Thompson shouldve done more than Sherman since the polar bear has more money.

You fail to see that Sherman left Thompson not only with a shortage of money, but a shortage of good, healthy players as well.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

You fail to see that Sherman left Thompson not only with a shortage of money, but a shortage of good, healthy players as well.

You fail to see that in Sherman's 1st year as GM, he started with little bit more than 2 mil (less than the 7.5 M thompson had last season), and Pack also had tons of injures, especially at OT.

Sherman finished 12-4.

[BF4MVP]

1 29 Nick Barnett LB Oregon State - B+ - He's not an elite linebacker, but solid. He's a "B+" player. Better than the more highly touted Boss Bailey and EJ Henderson at this point. 7 points*

3 79 Kenny Peterson DE Ohio State - D - Made his presence known a few times last year, but other than that, he's been worthless. Nowhere near a third round pick. 2 points

5 147 James Lee DT Oregon State - D- - 2 points

5 166 Hunter Hillenmeyer LB Vanderbilt - F - You can pick a solid player, but in order for it to count for anything he has to be on YOUR team. 0 points

6 212 Brennan Curtin T Notre Dame - F - Did he even play at all? 0 points

7 245 Chris Johnson DB Louisville - C- - Even though he rarely saw the field due to injury, the speed demon from Louisville was able to net us Robert Thomas via trade, whom I considered a "C-" player. 6 points**

7 253 DeAndrew Rubin WR South Florida - F - He got cut during training camp the year he was drafted. 0 points

7 256 Carl Ford WR Toledo - F - I think we all had high hopes for him. He never panned out here, and he's on a practice squad somewhere. 0 points

7 257 Steve Josue LB Carson-Newman - F - I think I remember him being promoted from the practice squad a couple times, also made a little noise in preseason for about a game, but that was it. 0 points

*Scoring system based on the impact he has had, and the round he was drafted in.

**Johnson gets 6 points because he was such a late draft pick, and it is harder to uncover decent players (or in this case, players who net you decent players via trade.

Overall average: 1.89 - D

I know it's a flawed scoring system, but I did my best.

[retailguy]

Address these.

What team has done this successfully and won a superbowl AND remained competitive for more than a year or so? This happens in Baseball all the time. The Marlins have done it twice in recent memory.

What do you do when a player doesn't want to accept a heavily backloaded deal understanding they will probably never see the vast majority of the money?

What do you make of the downfall of one the best franchises in the NFL in the Tennesee Titans. They continually were one of the better teams in the league for about 5-6 years always being a top 3-4 team in the AFC. Eventually the money caught up with them since they wanted to keep their core together. How do you handle this situation?

What do you do when you keep pushing back player's money ala the Titans with Steve McNair and all of a sudden the player refuses to restructure his constract again because he is sick of being jipped out of money and they cannot cut him because the immediate cap hit would crush the teams future. What do you do in this situation and how do you go about avoiding this in the world of backloading contracts?

Where do you go to school? I saw you had exams this week in another thread, but you didn't see my question of where you went.

I have tons more questions about your GM philosophies, but I will wait for these answers and not overload you now since you're busy with school.

Well Partial, I'll try again. Frankly I didn't think some of the points were worth responding to. But whatever...


What do you do when a player doesn't want to accept a heavily backloaded deal understanding they will probably never see the vast majority of the money?

If the player doesn't want to sign, or renegotiate, he doesn't have to, HOWEVER, most do because they get something else besides a backloaded contract. Your point ignored this, and was thus incomplete. No one would sign a backloaded deal, WITHOUT some guarantee of some type. Tank has never advocated this, he's always stated converting existing salary to some type of bonus. That stuff happens all the time.


What team has done this successfully and won a superbowl AND remained competitive for more than a year or so? This happens in Baseball all the time. The Marlins have done it twice in recent memory.


None, but staying competitive wasn't the plan. It was go for broke.


What do you do when you keep pushing back player's money ala the Titans with Steve McNair and all of a sudden the player refuses to restructure his constract again because he is sick of being jipped out of money and they cannot cut him because the immediate cap hit would crush the teams future. What do you do in this situation and how do you go about avoiding this in the world of backloading contracts?


McNair was NOT cheated. He restructured over and over again, but ALWAYS received the money he was due. Tennessee just pushed the BILL into future years. This year Mcnair is due 9 million but his "total cap charge" is 23. something million. Tennessee can't pay the 9 million this year because of the TOTAL CAP CHARGE, plus Mcnair is hurt and Tennessee wants a bargain.

Your point is INCOMPLETE and assumes McNair was cheated. He wasn't.

Backloaded contracts are a "way of life" in the NFL. It doesn't need to be "fixed" any more than the average guys auto loan needs to be "fixed". You push your auto purchase into the future, don't you? You still "buy it now" but pay for it later, right? Why should the NFL fix this? It's NOT BROKEN. It is working EXACTLY the way it was intended. Teams have a CHOICE as to how to spend their money. It is their money, they should have that choice, right?



Where do you go to school?

I think he goes to Georgetown, but am not sure.



Well Partial, that's all of them. I think your understanding of the Salary Cap, and the NFL may be just as biased the other way as Tank's. It is definitely slanted to your perspective as is tanks analysis.

When you see someone making Sherman out to be an "idiot" or a "demon" or "not qualified to be an NFL coach" it just shows that person doesn't understand the NFL or football in general. ALL THESE GUYS are qualified. They couldn't get the job if they weren't. Some wind up being better than others, but you can't discount the situation. Belicheck failed horribly in Cleveland, and became a HOF'er in New England.

Holmgren was a "hero" in Green Bay, and has been "average" in Seattle. I live near Seattle and the media is AGAIN criticizing him because he won't sign an extension. He is not the "hero" he was in Green Bay. The situation is different, now Holmgren is average....

Just be careful when you criticize.... Very few NFL coaches leave the "business" on their terms. [/b]

[ND72]

lets face it...our grad is based on Nick Barnett. some people hate him, some people love him. I tend to love the guy. i think the lack of players on our defense has made him "over play" from time to time, which hurts him more than helps him. He was vastly "unknown" to many, and compared to Boss bailey and E.J. Henderson, I'd say we got the top LB of the top of the draft.

Barnett is a B+/A-

the draft is probably a D+ at best

[MJZiggy]

You fail to see that Sherman left Thompson not only with a shortage of money, but a shortage of good, healthy players as well.

You fail to see that in Sherman's 1st year as GM, he started with little bit more than 2 mil (less than the 7.5 M thompson had last season), and Pack also had tons of injures, especially at OT.

Sherman finished 12-4.

They better have gone 12-4--he took over a SuperBowl team. Funny, Thompson took over almost the same team...just much older.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

You fail to see that Sherman left Thompson not only with a shortage of money, but a shortage of good, healthy players as well.

You fail to see that in Sherman's 1st year as GM, he started with little bit more than 2 mil (less than the 7.5 M thompson had last season), and Pack also had tons of injures, especially at OT.

Sherman finished 12-4.

They better have gone 12-4--he took over a SuperBowl team. Funny, Thompson took over almost the same team...just much older.

you are wrong. Sherman took over a 12-4 team and matched that record during his 1st year as GM. Thompson took over a 10-6 team and turn it into a 4-12 team.

Shows that Sherman is the better GM.

[retailguy]

You fail to see that Sherman left Thompson not only with a shortage of money, but a shortage of good, healthy players as well.

???? There was no "shortage of money". It was just spent differently. Sherman spent everything he had. Thompson did not.

This year they'll be some creative "deals" to push money into the future. That trend is relatively new. Philadelphia has done this the past 10 years or so, and now other teams are catching on.

Seattle has had its share of "cap issues" in the past few years. TT was part of that, I'm sure. TT is just now in total control and can do what he believes.

Sherman left players that fit his "system". They didn't fit TT's system. Most are playing elsewhere.

Sherman had more "busts" because he had fewer draft picks. Yes, he was the guy who traded them, but don't "lose the distortion" and draw conclusions that aren't there. Too few picks led to most of his problems.

[retailguy]

They better have gone 12-4--he took over a SuperBowl team. Funny, Thompson took over almost the same team...just much older.

you are wrong. Sherman took over a 12-4 team and matched that record during his 1st year as GM. Thompson took over a 10-6 team and turn it into a 4-12 team.

Shows that Sherman is the better GM.

Ziggy, Sherman took over an 8-8 team that was poorly coached by Ray Rhodes. He turned that team into a 10-6 squad.

He inherited a veteran team from Ron Wolf that was SEVERAL PLAYERS short of Super Bowl quality. Sherman couldn't get them over the hump, partially because of his drafting ability, also injuries, and finally from some poor decisions during games.

Those that claim Sherman was "set up" for success and just blew it just don't get it. I have heard over and over again that Sherman had Favre, therefore he has ZERO EXCUSES. Balderdash!! If that is true, then Don Shula is a horrible coach. He had MARINO and could never get them over the hump. Jimmy Johnson as well.

It takes more than a QB people!

[MJZiggy]

Damn. What is wrong with my brain this week. I'm going to bed.

[Scott Campbell]

you are wrong. Sherman took over a 12-4 team and matched that record during his 1st year as GM. Thompson took over a 10-6 team and turn it into a 4-12 team.

Shows that Sherman is the better GM.

LOL

No it doesn't show that Sherman was the better GM.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

you are wrong. Sherman took over a 12-4 team and matched that record during his 1st year as GM. Thompson took over a 10-6 team and turn it into a 4-12 team.

Shows that Sherman is the better GM.

LOL

No it doesn't show that Sherman was the better GM.

Only in your mind it doesnt.

[Scott Campbell]

Only in your mind it doesnt.

Do you really think I'm the only one?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Only in your mind it doesnt.

Do you really think I'm the only one?

You and your likes: the Anti-Shermans.

[retailguy]

Only in your mind it doesnt.

Do you really think I'm the only one?

You and your likes: the Anti-Shermans.

What about me? I think TT is a better GM, but I like Sherman, what am I?