wow! Pats thinking about cutting Moss?

[Badgepack]

Moss is still an ass.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think TT's "best player available" credentials were firmly established with the pick of a defensive tackle in round 1. TT obviously saw a gem in JJ, I can't imagine he would pass him up just because of Moss. TT doesn't draft for the next season, that's clear. Driver is old and Moss is aging.

Thompson's best player available is hogwash (see him drafting guys at our three biggest need positions with our three picks in rounds 2 and 3). Just like most GMs, if he clearly likes a guy more than the guys at a need position, he'll draft that guy. Once you get out of the top of the 1st round, I'm sure guys are pretty bunched together on the board, so it's probably likely (but not guaranteed) that he would have went a different route.

As far as Moss, I was one that was for trading the pick at the time. There are three things to remember: 1) we have no idea how Randy Moss would have played in Green Bay. He played poorly in Oakland and he's played great in New England. He probably would have played somewhere in between in Green Bay, 2) the knock on Moss (from me anyways) wasn't that he sucked, it was that he's broken down. Two weeks into the season is too early to judge if that is the case, 3) one thing that seems to have blown the Moss deal was the fact Moss wanted a one year deal to play in Green Bay. Now, if my choice is Randy Moss for one year or James Jones for five years at a reasonable salary, I'd probably take Jones.

[woodbuck27]

I think it is very unlikely that Thompson would have picked up Moss, without drafting another reciever or two as insurance in case Moss didn't work out.

Face it, those of you that said Moss was not worth picking up, for whatever excuse was wrong. Just as I was wrong about the way that Thompson is building this team. Thompson is building for the future, and he is doing a great job of it. At the same time, Moss would have been a great addition to the Packers, and with the amount of cap room that the Packers have, the only argument that works for not getting him, is the simple fact that Moss may not have wanted to play in GB as much as he did in NE. That is the one thing Thompson did not have control over, and the one reason that nobody should blame Thompson.........unless/until we hear it from the horses (Moss) mouth himself, that he would have came to GB over NE.

Would you still say not picking up Moss was wrong if he goes in the tank the next 14 games and becomes a cnacer. YOu can't make a judgement on 2 games. Let the season play out.

When a talent like a Randy Moss comes available only common sense dictates that you giver to get that talent.

We lost one of our three best talents when Ahman Green wasn't offered enough to stay in Green Bay.

Common sense dictates that that quality of a player must be added and the cost only a third round pick?

You go for it !!!

You don't pansy around and offer only enough to ensure you don't lock up a talent like Moss.

Any NFL fan that predicates whether a deal done or not done was the correct move based on a player injury or not is not using correct thinking.

A decent fan of football doesn't wish or otherwise imagine that any NFL player should suffer the adversity of a long seasonal injury or to be knocked out of the game due to the same.

Anyone who wishes harm on another player deserves karma to inflict the worst injury on the team he loves to be a fan of.

Is there any member of this board that isn't well aware of the state we would be in if Brett Favre went done with a season endind injury.How about DD going out for many weeks or the season and worse both of these two top offensive leaders going down to serious injury.

I certainly believe that what goes around comes around.

KARMA.

We need that want that on our side.

[Harlan Huckleby]

we have no idea how Randy Moss would have played in Green Bay.

Very true. Favre was willing to go WAY out on a limb in saying he would be make a difference. Maybe he saw something.

I just enjoy twisting the knife

[mmmdk]

Moss is still an ass.

Yeah but the Lombardi Trophy is more likely going to Boston than Green Bay; even though Packers are 2-0.

How is winning not paramount?

[Badgepack]

We would have only had Moss for 1 or 2 years, I'd rather have JJ for the next 5-6 years. Moss is doing great this year in a great offense, but he may have been a whiney bitch if he wasn't getting the ball with the Packers. He's an ass.

[PackerBlues]

For anyone to assume that Moss would have been a cancer or a bust in GB, is just as bad, or no different than someone saying that he would have been a sure thing. He did great with the Vikes, having a loser like Culpepper for a QB, and in Oakland, things went sour fast.

I cannot fault Moss for wanting out of Oakland. My assumption/opinion, would have been that if you put Moss with any great QB, he would return to form, and be one of the greatest WR threats in the game. So far, it looks like that is exactly what happened, and now every other team in the league has to look at NE and Moss as a major road block in a run for the playoffs, or the SB. I do not think for one second that NE would look anywhere near as dangerous as they do now, without Moss.

[Partial]

I wonder if the results of this thread would have been the same if the name was Owens instead of Moss that TT should have traded a pick for.

My guess is no. They're essentially the same headache for the same production.

[woodbuck27]

Moss is still an ass.

Yup and that ASS gets his ASS into the endzone with the ball for TD's.

That ASS leads his team in receiving when he has a decent QB to play with.

Of course Tom Brady is far superior in that regard and therefore to have Favre and Moss would have really hurt us.

Then I just read the humble squeel that . . ''well we don't know if he would have played as well in Green Bay''.

What would have stopped him? The sausage or maybe the quality of the Ole Milwaukee isn't up to scratch?

That argument is moot.

We have a GM that can't get the paste of his trowsers to get to.

We need this and that in real terms. At what Moss would have cost us we look stupid not getting Randy Moss or anyone els into Green bay and contributing to us winning as easily as we are seeing New England win.

The Chargers were dead in the water last night and a big reason was Mr. Randy Moss.

Teddy blows another one.

[Patler]

I read yet again over the weekend, ( I read this at the time, too) that Thompson went to bed one night thinking he had completed a deal for Moss. He thought it was a done deal only to find out the next day that a trade with New England was reported as final. Neither Oakland nor Moss' agent got back to him to give him an opportunity to offer still more. One article indicated he was never even told that New England was a serious consideration.

If, and I do say "if" because none of us really know for sure, that is what happened, Thompson can hardly be blamed for not getting Moss. TT and the Packers may have been played by Oakland or Moss to get more out of NE than what was offered originally.

Putting myself in the shoes of Randy Moss, I have to ask why I would WANT to go to GB? New England would be much more appealing. A QB as good or better than a 38 year old Favre, a QB that will be around as long as Moss wants to be there (Favre could be done after any season now) and a team that IS a legitimate playoff contender in NE. Why would you want to go to GB if you had your choice?

[Scott Campbell]

I have friends in Philly. They look back on everything that went down with T.O., and even though they got to the Superbowl, they still wish they hadn't gotten Owens.

Moss has had a terrific couple of games, but there is plenty of time for this unholy marriage to go sour.

[PackerBlues]

Look at the bright side, if Moss has a great season, he becomes a FA next year.........and if Favre decides to stick around for another year to make a SB run, Thompson has enough cap room to sign Moss as another weapon for Favre.

[Badgepack]

Moss is still an ass.

Yup and that ASS gets his ASS into the endzone with the ball for TD's.

That ASS leads his team in receiving when he has a decent QB to play with.

Of course Tom Brady is far superior in that regard and therefore to have Favre and Moss would have really hurt us.

Then I just read the humble squeel that . . ''well we don't know if he would have played as well in Green Bay''.

What would have stopped him? The sausage or maybe the quality of the Ole Milwaukee isn't up to scratch?



That argument is moot.

We have a GM that can't get the paste of his trowsers to get to.

We need this and that in real terms. At what Moss would have cost us we look stupid not getting Randy Moss or anyone els into Green bay and contributing to us winning as easily as we are seeing New England win.

The Chargers were dead in the water last night and a big reason was Mr. Randy Moss.

Teddy blows another one.

That ass leaves the field before the game is over
That ass plays hard when he wants to
That ass would be a poor example for our younger players
That ass would have been in GB for 1 year
That ass would bitch and moan if he wasn't getting enough catches
That ass is playing great right now, with a Superbowl contender, thus he is happy

[Bretsky]

I read yet again over the weekend, ( I read this at the time, too) that Thompson went to bed one night thinking he had completed a deal for Moss. He thought it was a done deal only to find out the next day that a trade with New England was reported as final. Neither Oakland nor Moss' agent got back to him to give him an opportunity to offer still more. One article indicated he was never even told that New England was a serious consideration.

If, and I do say "if" because none of us really know for sure, that is what happened, Thompson can hardly be blamed for not getting Moss. TT and the Packers may have been played by Oakland or Moss to get more out of NE than what was offered originally.

Putting myself in the shoes of Randy Moss, I have to ask why I would WANT to go to GB? New England would be much more appealing. A QB as good or better than a 38 year old Favre, a QB that will be around as long as Moss wants to be there (Favre could be done after any season now) and a team that IS a legitimate playoff contender in NE. Why would you want to go to GB if you had your choice?

You are sounding like an apologist

Bottom line, whether he went to bed thinking he had a deal or not, is he had months to make it happen and he didn't get it done.

From there to each his own as to whether you want to praise him for not making it happen or criticize him.


Cheers,
B

[Patler]

You are sounding like an apologist

Bottom line, whether he went to bed thinking he had a deal or not, is he had months to make it happen and he didn't get it done.

From there to each his own as to whether you want to praise him for not making it happen or criticize him.

Cheers,
B

And you are starting to sound a bit whiny.

Why do we have to do either, praise or criticize him on the Moss deal?

There are 31 other teams trying to get better, just like the Packers. There are around to 2000 players who have their own goals, their own likes and dislikes. Who knows what Moss REALLY wanted, and if he would have come to GB under any conditions. I would hazard to guess some players do not want to come to GB, given a choice, and some (sacrilege here) don't want to play with Brett Favre. They might prefer someone who will be here the year after next, or even next year for that matter. Especially receivers.

Your position, as exemplified by your signature, has never made any sense to me.

1.Is there some rule that to be a good GM you HAVE to sign at least two "legitimate" free agents every year?

2. Why 2? Why not 3? or 1?

3. He signed three last year. why not "average" at 2?

4. What's "legitimate"? The absurd part is that at the time they were signed, Marquand Manual, Mark Roman and Joe Johnson would probably have satisfied your "requirements", but if all had been signed this year would GB be better for it? Would TT be a better GM because of it?


I much prefer to evaluate TT on his overall performance.