Time to Extend TT's contract

[son of a vic]

No need to extend TT right now. I'd wait till his last season and if things are continuing upward they way they have since 4-12, I'd pay him like a top 5 GM.

I disagree. after 6 games of very strange football, and 2 previous seasons of 12-20 football, the time to extend him is NOW while his value is lower - just like you all laud him for doing with the players. Now is the time for a BARGAIN.

I think the duration should be about 45 years or so, with a "no death" clause in the contract. His ass is NOT sneaking out of here like Lombardi did with a move to Washington, followed by an untimely death....

When you've got a "future star" in the making and it is clear to every learned and not so learned mind, you MUST act. You MUST NOT WAIT, or, like Moss he'll end up in New England with all of the rest of the good


players/coaches.

I truly do not understand your stance on this issue. You hate on Thompson, (while the team is on the upswing), but you were standing on the deck of the SS Sherman, bailing water on a ship that was already sunk thanks to Captain Mike.
Nobody says you have to love the guy, but there is progress being made through the draft, that didn't happen under Sherman. He has made mistakes for sure, But Ted is an upgrade over Sherman as a GM, whether you like it , or agree with it.
I thought Sherman was a fat idiot, you think Ted is a lying prick. The difference is that I didn't bang on Shermy until he got a legit chance (4 years) to prove what a dumb ass he was. You, on the other hand, hated Ted from day one, simply because he replaced your boy.

[Joemailman]

No need to extend TT right now. I'd wait till his last season and if things are continuing upward they way they have since 4-12, I'd pay him like a top 5 GM.

I disagree. after 6 games of very strange football, and 2 previous seasons of 12-20 football, the time to extend him is NOW while his value is lower - just like you all laud him for doing with the players. Now is the time for a BARGAIN.

I think the duration should be about 45 years or so, with a "no death" clause in the contract. His ass is NOT sneaking out of here like Lombardi did with a move to Washington, followed by an untimely death....

When you've got a "future star" in the making and it is clear to every learned and not so learned mind, you MUST act. You MUST NOT WAIT, or, like Moss he'll end up in New England with all of the rest of the good players/coaches.

Oh, I get it. Because you preached doom and gloom about what would happen in the early part of the season, and the Packers are 5-1, that qualifies as 6 games of very strange football. How silly of me to think of it as good football. Really, you and Woody should probably consider starting your own support group. How traumatic this season must be for you.

[cheesner]

Before TT is extended we have to see how he approaches this offseason. If the Packers finish the season strong and make the playoffs, that's a good sign that the team is ready to make a big SB push, and that's the time to make a big push for one or two big FAs. Think Turner. If he continues to plod after THIS season then something is wrong, then there's something he just doesn't get and then maybe it's time for him to go.

Were you one of the poster clamoring for a big name FA Safety this past season? Had we done that, would Bigby have gotten the reps? Would he have developed? Signing a big name FA (all of whom were not as good as Atari has turned out to be) would have made this team worse. Why does Ted HAVE to sign a FA in order to compete for a SB? How do all the players who are FAs come into the league? The draft.

I say sign TT now for about 10 years.

If his original deal was for 5 years, he has had 3 drafts, he only has 2 yrs left.

[superfan]

No need to extend TT right now. I'd wait till his last season and if things are continuing upward they way they have since 4-12, I'd pay him like a top 5 GM.

I disagree. after 6 games of very strange football, and 2 previous seasons of 12-20 football, the time to extend him is NOW while his value is lower - just like you all laud him for doing with the players. Now is the time for a BARGAIN.

I think the duration should be about 45 years or so, with a "no death" clause in the contract. His ass is NOT sneaking out of here like Lombardi did with a move to Washington, followed by an untimely death....

When you've got a "future star" in the making and it is clear to every learned and not so learned mind, you MUST act. You MUST NOT WAIT, or, like Moss he'll end up in New England with all of the rest of the good players/coaches.

It is explicitly stated in the well documented collective bargaining agreement for GMs that the "no death" clause is not allowed. However, there is no specific mention of cryogenics and/or cloning, so perhaps that would be an acceptable compromise.

Should those negotiations fall through, I'm in complete agreement with Scott Campbell's previous take on extending TT's and MM's contracts.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Re: Time to Extend TT's contract

To do some Patler like nitpicking, I can't think of any bargain free agent TT has brought in or successfully recruited. Pickett deal was fair, Woodsen was fair. Those are clearly his two free agent successes but neither signed below fair market value.

Not that it disproves your point, but I think Donald Lee qualifies. I'm hoping Koren Robinson will qualify soon.

[Patler]

TT came within a whisker of losing Kampman to the Vikings. It shoud never have gone that far. TT scared the wits out of me on that late signing and was unnecessary given Aarons work ethic.

Your memory is very foggy, Woodbuck. The Packers never "came within a whisker of losing Kampman to the Vikings."

Kampman was a RESTRICTED free agent, and the Packers made a qualifying offer. That meant they would not lose him unless the compensation they would receive was more valuable in THEIR opinion than his services for the contract offered by another team. They had the right to match. The Vikings were never going to get him, unless the Packers were willing to give him up. The Packers held the cards.

The following year, when Kampman would have been an UNRESTRICTED free agent, they reached a deal before he even became a free agent. The contract was signed before any other team could even court him.

Your opinion of TT apparently is based, at least in part, on erroneous understandings of the facts.

[retailguy]

No need to extend TT right now. I'd wait till his last season and if things are continuing upward they way they have since 4-12, I'd pay him like a top 5 GM.

I disagree. after 6 games of very strange football, and 2 previous seasons of 12-20 football, the time to extend him is NOW while his value is lower - just like you all laud him for doing with the players. Now is the time for a BARGAIN.

I think the duration should be about 45 years or so, with a "no death" clause in the contract. His ass is NOT sneaking out of here like Lombardi did with a move to Washington, followed by an untimely death....

When you've got a "future star" in the making and it is clear to every learned and not so learned mind, you MUST act. You MUST NOT WAIT, or, like Moss he'll end up in New England with all of the rest of the good players/coaches.

It is explicitly stated in the well documented collective bargaining agreement for GMs that the "no death" clause is not allowed. However, there is no specific mention of cryogenics and/or cloning, so perhaps that would be an acceptable compromise.

Should those negotiations fall through, I'm in complete agreement with Scott Campbell's previous take on extending TT's and MM's contracts.

Finally. someone gets it.... Praise God.

[vince]

Oh, everyone gets it RG.

It's just not the slightest bit humorous. In the face of facts that completely overwhelm your well-documented position on just about everything Packers, you respond with absurdity.

The post's undertones of attempting to belittle Thompson supporters, combined with its complete irrelevance to anything even resembling reality make it completely undeserving of a response - that's all. Charitable contribution by superfan.

Exaggerating the position of those who disagree with you to the point of ridiculousness not only not the slightest bit "funny," it's dishonest and completely discrediting of the person who attempts it. Such underhanded attacking of other contributors to the board is unbecoming of a mod.

Stick to the facts RG, assuming you can use them to support your conclusions. Making shit up about your intellectual adversaries here does you no justice.

[son of a vic]

Finally. someone gets it.... Praise God.[/quote]


Do not bring thee almighty into your vendetta against a lyin prick. It's not good politics.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Ted Thompson Q&A: Criticism goes with territory, GM says
By Mike Vandermause

Ted Thompson was hired in January 2005 as Green Bay Packers general manager. Under his direction over the past 33 months, the Packers hired a new coach and overhauled their roster. On the field, the Packers have progressed from 4-12 in 2005 to 8-8 last year to 5-1 this season.

In an interview with Green Bay Press-Gazette sports editor Mike Vandermause on Thursday, Thompson discussed, among other topics, the Packers' fast start, how he handled offseason criticism, his assessment of first-round draft pick Justin Harrell and whether there's hope for the team's struggling run game.

Q: Were you expecting such a fast start? If someone had said you would be 5-1, would that have been a surprise to you?

Thompson: I don't know if in my business you ever think about stuff like that. I said at the start I expected us to win, and that sort of thing. In football, you just try to win every week and add them up at the end. We're happy to be where we are. We haven't played our best football yet. I guess we feel optimistic.

Q: Last year after six games you were 2-4. What's been the biggest difference between last year and this year?

Thompson: The team was able to hang in there and win some games. I know often times the quote is used, 'It's an ugly win.' But that's the way you survive and you win in the NFL. You hang in there, even when you're not playing your best ball, and you figure out a way to win. One week it's kicking a long field goal. Maybe the next week it's picking up a fumble. It's just figuring out a way to get it done. I think the team has a little more confidence in doing that, and certainly I think as a whole our defense has played solid. I think they can play better as well.

Q: When you hired Mike McCarthy, you saw something in him. What do you like best about him and the job he's done so far?

Thompson: I think he's what I thought in terms of being a very tough, honest guy. He relates real well with the players. I think he understands that players are different. It's like Bum Phillips used to say, 'You don't treat all players the same, but you treat them all fairly.' Everybody is a little bit different. I think you have to be as a coach, especially in this day and age, able to know which buttons to push on which players. And his staff as a whole, they don't get all flustered. Injuries are going to happen in this league. They happen to everybody. They seem very comfortable in the work they've done in training other people. Especially I know we get a lot of guff because we've got a lot of young guys. But they're not put off by doing that. They just play the next guy. Mike Holmgren was excellent at that. You can worry about stuff until it kills you, but you've got to play the next game. I think Mike has some good qualities in that area.

Q: Over the long haul, can a team succeed without a productive running game?

Thompson: Sure they can. Indianapolis did it for several years until last year when they had the new running back. We expect to run the ball. We expect to be more productive running the ball. We've played some teams that people quite frankly just don't run very well against them. ... You do what you're doing (well). We have some good receivers. We have a very good quarterback. We have good pass protection. Our running game is still a work in progress. I don't think you can necessarily assume that we're not going to be more successful running the ball. I think it will be a week in and week out kind of thing.

Q: So you think there will be improvement in that area?

Thompson: Oh yeah. We're looking for improvement in the passing game, too.

Q: Besides your opponents, are there any other reasons you've been able to pinpoint why you haven't run the ball more effectively?

Thompson: I think it's a combination of our running game is sort of a multiple dance by multiple dance partners. You have 11 offensive guys and 11 defensive guys, and you want your offensive guys to be in the right spot. Sometimes it's one of the offensive linemen not getting his block. Sometimes it's a back not seeing the hole quickly enough. Sometimes it's this, sometimes it's that. We just haven't got it going the way we want to yet.

Q: Are you satisfied with the performance of the running backs so far?

Thompson: Yeah. I like our running backs. I like the group. I think we're still trying to find what roles for each is the best particular matchup for us. But I like our potential. I don't think we've played to our potential yet.

Q: You've invested several draft picks in your backfield, and you were criticized in the offseason for not picking up a veteran free agent. Do you feel confident about the group you have?

Thompson: I do like the group. It's kind of like what I've said about the defensive line over time. I think the group has to be better than any of the individuals. But I think we're OK with that.

Q: Did you hear a lot of the criticism in the offseason about not doing enough to bolster your offense, and did it bother you?

Thompson: Certainly you hear that. And I've said this before, it's an absolute privilege to work for the Packers, and when you're in a position like I am, because of the passion, because of the interest that we have state- and nation-wide, it's always going to be a focus of attention. You can't sway what you're thinking based on talk shows or whatever. You just can't do that. It doesn't mean everything turns out exactly the way you want either. You do the best you can and you move on to the next thing.

Q: Are you tempted to say 'I told you so' after your fast start?

Thompson: Absolutely not. Because I think your normal fan, for the most part, at least all the ones I talk to in the summer time, they say good luck and we're pulling for you. Packer fans just want the Packers to do (well). They want good quality people and they want players that play hard. I think we have a group that does that. Again, this is a journey. This is way too early to say I told you so even if one was tempted to say I told you so.

Q: Do you ever get nervous because you're carrying only two tight ends and two quarterbacks? Is that like treading on thin ice?

Thompson: It's football. Things are going to happen. You're going to have injuries. You can't protect yourself against everything. That's just the way it worked out this year. It wasn't by design. There's no master plan saying the right way to do this is with two tight ends. It's just the way it kind of worked out. You go with what you've got. It doesn't do any good to be anxious about it or worry about it. It's just the way it is.

Q: What's your assessment of linebacker A.J. Hawk's performance? Is he playing up to the level of a No. 5 overall draft pick?

Thompson: I think A.J.'s a very good player. He was a good player when he got here and he's a better player now. He plays hard all the time. He's incredibly talented, and his day will come in terms of the big plays. Sometimes it just doesn't happen for you. I think him and Nick (Barnett) have played very, very well.

Q: You stocked up on the defensive line. Are you pleased with the way that unit has played?

Thompson: Yes. You will win with defense, especially with a defensive line. As I've said so much that people are probably sick of me saying it, I really like our group. And I like the mentality of our group and the fact they play well together. You can substitute different guys. You can have different rotations and they still play the game. I really do like that group.

Q: You're not getting a lot of immediate impact out of first-round draft pick Justin Harrell? Why did you draft him in the first round, and will that investment pay off down the road?

Thompson: Obviously, especially with a first-round pick, people want immediate results. I think in a perfect world, it would work that way. I'm completely confident that spending a first-round pick on Justin Harrell is going to be viewed long term as a very wise investment. But the proof's in the pudding. But he suited up the last couple weeks and did all right. He's still growing into this.

Q: What do you enjoy most about your job?

Thompson: I enjoy most about my job, No. 1, is seeing a very happy locker room. That really is the best thing about my job. But then, I think it was the San Diego game, it was right near the end of the game, and Bob (Harlan) and I were sitting in our box, and everybody in the stadium was standing up and they were singing one of those goofy songs and they were twirling some sort of white things that the marketing people had given out. And you look, and both of us said almost instantly, 'This is why we do this, for a moment like this.' To see everybody having a good time. The team has played well. They beat a very good team, and that's why you do this.

[RashanGary]

I must admit that I enjoy seeing Thomson succeed. He walked into a horrible situation. I know the menality of putting in early investments with a vision to have them pay off. You know it's hard, but you do it because you have the ultimate goal in mind. I believe that he knew he was making hard decisions. He put the weight of the organization on his shoulders and left no where else but himself to point the finger at if things went wrong. He didn't take any easy bail outs. He did everything the right way, even if it was hard to start.

[run pMc]

Don't know when his contract ends, M3's is next year. I was thinking TT had more time? That being the case, no reason to extend it yet.

As for how he's doing, I'll quote Peter King and let you draw any analogies to decide where this team is probably headed:

The incompetence of the Miami Dolphins front office cannot be overstated. At least the incompetence between 1998 and 2003.

<snip/>

Miami had 59 picks total in those six drafts -- 46 used to draft players, and 13 used to trade for 10 other players (Tyrone Wheatley, Kevin Gogan, Jim Druckenmiller, Alonzo Mayes, Matt Turk, Ricky Williams, Jeff Ogden, Cade McNown, Jay Williams, Sage Rosenfels). They traded two ones and a four for Ricky Williams and a four in return, and traded two sixes for McNown.

Zero for 59! Astonishing.

Want to know why the Patriots are (Matt) Light years ahead of the Dolphins right now? It's the base of home-grown fifth- through 10th-year veterans -- the guys who should be the bedrock of a good team -- that New England has and Miami doesn't. Brady, Light, Richard Seymour, Asante Samuel, Ty Warren, Dan Koppen, Eugene Wilson. Nine Patriots from those six drafts suited up for New England's win at Miami on Sunday. No players from those six drafts suited up for Miami.

"It's a big reason why we are where we are right now,'' Jason Taylor (Miami class of '97) said the other day.

No. It's the big reason

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...21/mmqb/2.html

[The Leaper]

No need to extend TT right now.

Thompson doesn't seem the type to jump at money. The lack of limelight in Green Bay probably suits him just fine. I don't think we need to be that afraid of someone else swooping in and snatching him.

As long as Green Bay pays him an acceptable salary, I don't see any reason why he would leave Green Bay right now. He seems to really enjoy building this roster...and seeing the fruits of his work come to fruition has to be meaningful to him.

That said, when the time comes, the Packers need to do what it takes to keep Thompson in town. He's easily one of the top 10 GMs in the league, and near the top in terms of scouting college talent. In another year, this team might show enough to move him up even higher in that regard.

[Merlin]

Remember, whatever you do in this board, don't disagree with the masses. Can anyone tell me what happens when you put a pile of rookies on a roster with many of them starting? Some of them will turn out to be be good players. Thompson is playing the odds by drafting AND keeping a ton of young players. So far there have been some pleasant surprises. You could do the same thing with free agents and have the same results. The Packers are 5-1 for a lot of reasons but attributing it all to Thompson is naive. Yes, we beat some good teams from 2006, but this is 2007. Outside of the Giants, who have we beat? The Eagles? The Chargers? Both of them look to be really inconsistent this year. The Giants even looked inconsistent to start the season, you know when we played them? We barely beat the Vikings, we blew the Bears game and if the our defense didn't finally show up in the second half, we lose to the Redskins. Those were our last three games and we didn't look good at all. The excuses abound as to why, mostly "we're young and will make mistakes" But never a thought about why we are in this position to begin with. For as much credit is you give Thompson, you have to look at the other side of that. With a more experienced offensive line, some depth ANYWHERE, maybe we wouldn't be discussing 5-1 and narrow wins, maybe we would be discussing 6-0 and blow outs. The Patriots obviously have an obnoxious amount of talent. We have?

Yeah, let's extend the gambler who plays the lower odds of quantity over quality.

[cheesner]

Remember, whatever you do in this board, don't disagree with the masses. Can anyone tell me what happens when you put a pile of rookies on a roster with many of them starting? Some of them will turn out to be be good players. Thompson is playing the odds by drafting AND keeping a ton of young players. So far there have been some pleasant surprises.

That BASTARD! I knew he was up to something. Filling our roster with a lot of young talent! Stop TT! Stop the madness!

You could do the same thing with free agents and have the same results. The Packers are 5-1 for a lot of reasons but attributing it all to Thompson is naive. Yes, we beat some good teams from 2006, but this is 2007. Outside of the Giants, who have we beat? The Eagles? The Chargers? Both of them look to be really inconsistent this year. The Giants even looked inconsistent to start the season, you know when we played them? We barely beat the Vikings, we blew the Bears game and if the our defense didn't finally show up in the second half, we lose to the Redskins. Those were our last three games and we didn't look good at all. The excuses abound as to why, mostly "we're young and will make mistakes" But never a thought about why we are in this position to begin with. For as much credit is you give Thompson, you have to look at the other side of that. With a more experienced offensive line, some depth ANYWHERE, maybe we wouldn't be discussing 5-1 and narrow wins, maybe we would be discussing 6-0 and blow outs. The Patriots obviously have an obnoxious amount of talent. We have?

Yeah, let's extend the gambler who plays the lower odds of quantity over quality.

No. Lets extend the GM with the astute judgement of talent.

How many teams are 6-0 over even the last 5 years that won by blowouts? Maybe 3 teams in that time frame (SD, Indy, and NE). There are not a lot of dominating teams out there because it is very difficult to do. Signing FAs uses up cap space. You use up your cap space you can't keep your developing players. You don't keep your rising stars and you mire yourself in mediocrity.

SD, Indy, and NE, all built slowly through the draft. They developed their talent in-house to become a deep and talented team. I am not saying your plan to improve the Packers won't work, if it did, though, it would be the first time.