Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
17 Pages«<1213141516>»
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline uffda udfa  
#196 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 11:47:42 AM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 139
Applause Received: 138

Originally Posted by: musccy Go to Quoted Post
My point with the Patriots was to counter you bringing up the PFT comment and insinuating the Packers are one of the only franchises not supporting a top-tier QB. The Patriots were an easy example of how they, in a well publicized way, didn't support a franchise QB in his prime as he would have liked. In Indy, for much of his career Peyton didn't have a great RB and iffy defenses. The Saints recently let Reggie Bush go. We could go on with examples, but point being, I don't see how the Packers have squandered Aaron's past or future seasons. Pack93z just had a great post about the right fit and that there's a lot more than meets the eye.



More than meets the eye? What meets the eye is the total contentment on display from the fan base on this forum. Good is good enough...we should be content because we're the poor pitiful Packers from tiny poor Green bay. How wonderful it is we can win division titles being so insignificant. Wow! We don't need to go for it... Ted Thompson is right, his fanbase is tickled with how it is losing 3 years in a row in the playoffs getting blown off the field in 2 of those and they weren't even conference championships. Getting absolutely blown to bits in the post season two years in a row should've brought major changes to this franchise. It didn't. Now, 3 in a row soon to be 4 in a row and the at least we're good excuses will flow in earnest.
UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline musccy  
#197 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 12:01:22 PM(UTC)
musccy

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 5/7/2009(UTC)
Location: Pennsylvania

Applause Given: 220
Applause Received: 199

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post
More than meets the eye? What meets the eye is the total contentment on display from the fan base on this forum. Good is good enough...we should be content because we're the poor pitiful Packers from tiny poor Green bay. How wonderful it is we can win division titles being so insignificant. Wow! We don't need to go for it... Ted Thompson is right, his fanbase is tickled with how it is losing 3 years in a row in the playoffs getting blown off the field in 2 of those and they weren't even conference championships. Getting absolutely blown to bits in the post season two years in a row should've brought major changes to this franchise. It didn't. Now, 3 in a row soon to be 4 in a row and the at least we're good excuses will flow in earnest.


Do you read anything I post? I have said probably 4 times that this is not about "good being good enough." I along with many others were swearing up a storm in recent performances against the Giants and 49ers, or vs. Detroit on Thanksgiving. The Packers have had plenty of dud performances as a team, and plenty of questionable moves from Ted as a GM.

I can also see the forest from the trees though, and recognize the Packers aren't the ONLY team that loses big, who have holes, who have questionable GM moves or miss in the draft. I recognize it's coaches, player execution, injuries, and sometimes just bad luck. It is so much more than whether or not Ted spent a lot in F.A.

In baseball, you don't have to have a power hitter who can hit the ball out of the stadium to win. The Ichiros of the world who get on base consistently and put you in position to score runs can be every bit, and debatably more effective than the power hitter who may get you 4 quick runs with 1 swing, but just as likely may strike out all 4 times at the plate. Ted's methodical calculated approach does not mean he's satisfied with Division titles. It means he doesn't want to risk a big failure.


thanks Post received 1 applause.
Dexter_Sinister on 7/22/2014(UTC)
Offline uffda udfa  
#198 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 12:08:42 PM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 139
Applause Received: 138

Originally Posted by: musccy Go to Quoted Post
Do you read anything I post? I have said probably 4 times that this is not about "good being good enough." I along with many others were swearing up a storm in recent performances against the Giants and 49ers, or vs. Detroit on Thanksgiving. The Packers have had plenty of dud performances as a team, and plenty of questionable moves from Ted as a GM.

I can also see the forest from the trees though, and recognize the Packers aren't the ONLY team that loses big, who have holes, who have questionable GM moves or miss in the draft. I recognize it's coaches, player execution, injuries, and sometimes just bad luck. It is so much more than whether or not Ted spent a lot in F.A.

In baseball, you don't have to have a power hitter who can hit the ball out of the stadium to win. The Ichiros of the world who get on base consistently and put you in position to score runs can be every bit, and debatably more effective than the power hitter who may get you 4 quick runs with 1 swing, but just as likely may strike out all 4 times at the plate. Ted's methodical calculated approach does not mean he's satisfied with Division titles. It means he doesn't want to risk a big failure.


You say it isn't about good not being good enough but you sure trot out excuse after excuse to excuse it. Geesh.

We have the best QB in the NFL or do we not? I think you would agree with that. I don't drink the koolaid and I think that.

To have the best QB in the NFL and fail over and over and get one ring is not enough. Brady had 3 rings by this point in his career. Ben had been to multiple SuperBowls. Rodgers should not be a one hit wonder but I'm horribly concerned that is exactly what he'll be and you'll all be happy with it in the end because you saw the forest for the trees?????? You saw it? What you're going to see is some terrible football once we stop having two of best QB's in the history of the game under center. Welcome back to the Randy Wright era. To not try to milk this current era for every stinking drop is criminal. Just der der der'ing along like the good times in Green Bay are never going to end. I just don't get it. We may and likely will head right back to 80's football once Rodgers is over. I would hope we have more rings to celebrate when the times are lean than the one I believe we'll have to talk about.

Oh, the charge will come...if you think we aren't going to win why don;'t you do us a favor and .... I could have said the same thing when you believed we were going to win it all only to be blown out by the NYG and then the Niners the following year. I could've asked how can you watch this team and expect good things after being trounced mercilessly in the playoffs two years in a row? We watch for the same reasons...the hope that we might win. I just have a whole less hope than you because our GM is content to ride Aaron Rodgers because it worked ONCE.





UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline Pack93z  
#199 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 12:26:39 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 388
Applause Received: 1,042

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post


Oh, the charge will come...if you think we aren't going to win why don;'t you do us a favor and .... I could have said the same thing when you believed we were going to win it all only to be blown out by the NYG and then the Niners the following year. I could've asked how can you watch this team and expect good things after being trounced mercilessly in the playoffs two years in a row? We watch for the same reasons...the hope that we might win. I just have a whole less hope than you because our GM is content to ride Aaron Rodgers because it worked ONCE.


A couple of reasons:

1. Better health
2. Alterations in coaching decisions
3. Development of younger players
4. Because I am a fan. Do I expect to win it all. Yes. Do I think this roster, with QB is tow, can win it all. Yes I have seen the basic core do it. But like any team, the variables are so deep that laying the issue on the GM alone is not being... wait for it.. wait.... objective. (There that is tired out).

Personally.. I think there are better teams with more overall talent on them. I think we have several holes that are greater than a handful of teams out there. But I also know that every year the most talented team does not always hoist the trophy. Actually, they rarely do. It is the generally the team that overcomes and develops as the season wears on that plays the best in the playoffs.

I am also envious of teams that can sustain an attacking style defense over the course of a season.. or a team that when they have to can run the ball at will. A solid situational football team that can win in a magnitude of ways.. I just don't think that all falls at the feet of the GM. We also have had success relying on just the pass.. much to my chagrin. But that is the direction of the coach.. and is reflective upon the roster up until Mike McCarthy seen the light of balance. lol.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline uffda udfa  
#200 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 12:48:06 PM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 139
Applause Received: 138

Originally Posted by: Pack93z Go to Quoted Post
A couple of reasons:

1. Better health
2. Alterations in coaching decisions
3. Development of younger players
4. Because I am a fan. Do I expect to win it all. Yes. Do I think this roster, with QB is tow, can win it all. Yes I have seen the basic core do it. But like any team, the variables are so deep that laying the issue on the GM alone is not being... wait for it.. wait.... objective. (There that is tired out).

Personally.. I think there are better teams with more overall talent on them. I think we have several holes that are greater than a handful of teams out there. But I also know that every year the most talented team does not always hoist the trophy. Actually, they rarely do. It is the generally the team that overcomes and develops as the season wears on that plays the best in the playoffs.

I am also envious of teams that can sustain an attacking style defense over the course of a season.. or a team that when they have to can run the ball at will. A solid situational football team that can win in a magnitude of ways.. I just don't think that all falls at the feet of the GM. We also have had success relying on just the pass.. much to my chagrin. But that is the direction of the coach.. and is reflective upon the roster up until Mike McCarthy seen the light of balance. lol.

Ted Thompson has two more years. He will leave with one ring, IMO. Who knows, though? Maybe, Russell Wilson and Colin Kaepernick will both suffer season ending injuries and no other team will rise up over our good talent level? Maybe, we'll get some lucky bounces or official's calls? See, it's sad to rely on things like that when you have the best QB in the game. You should come into the season thinking every team in the NFL will be lucky to compete with you. It's the opposite.
UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline dfosterf  
#201 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 12:48:39 PM(UTC)
dfosterf

Rank: All Pro

United States
Joined: 8/19/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 179
Applause Received: 400

No.


I am now going to go back and read the 14 pages posted to date on this thread, on this subject. He is not flexible enough, imo.

Edit- No I am not going to read those 14 pages, it was driving me insane. I want to keep MM, I don't feel Ted Thompson. That's my vote.
UserPostedImage
damn skippy I'm an owner. I currently own a full .00001924537805515393 % of the Green Bay Packers.



Offline Pack93z  
#202 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 12:54:56 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 388
Applause Received: 1,042

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post
TT has two more years. He will leave with one ring, IMO. Who knows, though? Maybe, Russell Wilson and Colin Kaepernick will both suffer season ending injuries and no other team will rise up over our good talent level? Maybe, we'll get some lucky bounces or official's calls? See, it's sad to rely on things like that when you have the best QB in the game. You should come into the season thinking every team in the NFL will be lucky to compete with you. It's the opposite.


Realistically.. I think offensively, we have a chance to be the best. If Daniels continues to develop and Raji can return to form in the middle.. along with Matthews staying healthy.. I think we can compete talent wise with just about anyone.

Will we win it all.. the variables are so vast it is impossible to lay that claim down. But I think we have the talent to do so if we can remain healthier than the past two season.

Additionally, the final roster isn't complete at the moment.. there may be a pickup or trade that greatly affects the team. And it may not seem big at the moment but pay dividends ala Ryan Grant. Or Grady Jackson.

Oh.. and yes.. trading two 1st's for a TE would have overtaken the talent gap this year and the next couple. Big Grin
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline Pack93z  
#203 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 12:56:43 PM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 388
Applause Received: 1,042

Originally Posted by: dfosterf Go to Quoted Post
No.


I am now going to go back and read the 14 pages posted to date on this thread, on this subject. He is not flexible enough, imo.


I think almost anyone thinks he has underplayed the free agent market. So I can concur with the flexible statement. Although if Peppers has anything left.. it may be another Woodson verse a Saturday.
I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline musccy  
#204 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 2:01:40 PM(UTC)
musccy

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 5/7/2009(UTC)
Location: Pennsylvania

Applause Given: 220
Applause Received: 199

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post

To have the best QB in the NFL and fail over and over and get one ring is not enough.

I just have a whole less hope than you because our GM is content to ride Aaron Rodgers because it worked ONCE.


The last 5 NFL seasons, there have been 10 unique teams in the Super Bowl. If there is some other model out there that is clearly superior which the Packers aren't utilizing, then fine, do that but these past 5 seasons have shown that's not the case.

Ted's job is to equip the Packers with the personnel to win, and for reasons I've stated along with some of Pack93z's recent posts, I feel he generally has. Yes he's left some positions open, but every GM is going to have to take calculated risks at some positions. You can't pay to have an All Pro at every position, you'll eventually have to hope some rookies or unproven talent will excel at key positions. The Packers let GJ go hoping Boykin and the others could get the job done. It worked. Ted hoped MD could get it done at saftey, he was wrong.

There are 31 teams each year that didn't quite get all of those calculated gambles right. It doesn't have to mean you blow up the ship, and it doesn't have to mean you're settling for good enough if you don't make big changes.

thanks Post received 1 applause.
Dexter_Sinister on 7/22/2014(UTC)
Offline uffda udfa  
#205 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 2:17:48 PM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 139
Applause Received: 138

Originally Posted by: musccy Go to Quoted Post
The last 5 NFL seasons, there have been 10 unique teams in the Super Bowl. If there is some other model out there that is clearly superior which the Packers aren't utilizing, then fine, do that but these past 5 seasons have shown that's not the case.

Ted's job is to equip the Packers with the personnel to win, and for reasons I've stated along with some of Pack93z's recent posts, I feel he generally has. Yes he's left some positions open, but every GM is going to have to take calculated risks at some positions. You can't pay to have an All Pro at every position, you'll eventually have to hope some rookies or unproven talent will excel at key positions. The Packers let GJ go hoping Boykin and the others could get the job done. It worked. Ted hoped MD could get it done at saftey, he was wrong.

There are 31 teams each year that didn't quite get all of those calculated gambles right. It doesn't have to mean you blow up the ship, and it doesn't have to mean you're settling for good enough if you don't make big changes.



Just think what this team is minus Aaron Rodgers when you hail TT's generally good performance. His generally good performance is actually pretty substandard minus him. Oh, I know... RC18, Finley and Clay were also out... 2-5-1. If not for the miracle at Dallas 1-6-1. Heck, we barely beat dreadful Atlanta in our yard...but we almost got the brutal Steelers so I suppose that evens one of them.


UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline musccy  
#206 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 2:34:06 PM(UTC)
musccy

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 5/7/2009(UTC)
Location: Pennsylvania

Applause Given: 220
Applause Received: 199

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post
Just think what this team is minus Aaron Rodgers when you hail TT's generally good performance. His generally good performance is actually pretty substandard minus him. Oh, I know... RC18, Finley and Clay were also out... 2-5-1. If not for the miracle at Dallas 1-6-1. Heck, we barely beat dreadful Atlanta in our yard...but we almost got the brutal Steelers so I suppose that evens one of them.


Take away any team's top-tier QB and what happens? The Packers are using roughly 15% of their salary cap for that one player, which hurts what they can do at other positions. Of course they'll take a hit when he goes down.




Offline uffda udfa  
#207 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 3:04:34 PM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 139
Applause Received: 138

Originally Posted by: musccy Go to Quoted Post
Take away any team's top-tier QB and what happens? The Packers are using roughly 15% of their salary cap for that one player, which hurts what they can do at other positions. Of course they'll take a hit when he goes down.


Yes, they will...but should it be to the point where we barely win a game against some of the worst teams in the NFL?

The Minnesota Vikings are best set up to be the dominant force in the NFC based on their rookie QB who is taking just a little over 1.2 million in cap space. If he is any good the division should be theirs for the next few seasons. The Packers, Bears and Lions have a lot of money committed to their starting QB's. The Vikes don't so with all that extra cash they should be the best team minus the QB and if the QB is good to better than good look out NFCN.

UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline musccy  
#208 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 3:10:04 PM(UTC)
musccy

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 5/7/2009(UTC)
Location: Pennsylvania

Applause Given: 220
Applause Received: 199

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa Go to Quoted Post


The Minnesota Vikings are best set up to be the dominant force in the NFC based on their rookie QB who is taking just a little over 1.2 million in cap space. If he is any good the division should be theirs for the next few seasons. The Packers, Bears and Lions have a lot of money committed to their starting QB's. The Vikes don't so with all that extra cash they should be the best team minus the QB and if the QB is good to better than good look out NFCN.



It worked for the 49'ers and Seahawks.
Offline uffda udfa  
#209 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 3:28:50 PM(UTC)
uffda udfa

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 4/25/2014(UTC)
Location: Texas

Applause Given: 139
Applause Received: 138

Originally Posted by: musccy Go to Quoted Post
It worked for the 49'ers and Seahawks.


It absolutely did... that is what is so upsetting...our window where Rodgers wasn't so highly paid is a distant memory. We didn't do enough then to win while we had this advantage.

Doing it now is only that much harder and one of the many reasons I don't think we'll see another ring under Rodgers. It is also why it drives me nutty reading stuff about affecting Aaron's good years. Those are over to a certain extent. We'll never have him at an MVP level with that kind of salary ever again.

The Niners didn't get their one... The Seahawks did. Let's see how this plays out between all these franchises and throw NY in there, too. Eli has a couple. That is sad that Eli Manning has more rings than Aaron Rodgers.

Will you consider Ted Thompson's regime a failure if we fail (no SB appearances) in the playoffs the next two years and he retires? I don't even have to tell you what I think about that.
UserPostedImage

It's one heckuva drug.
Offline musccy  
#210 Posted : Tuesday, July 22, 2014 3:39:32 PM(UTC)
musccy

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 5/7/2009(UTC)
Location: Pennsylvania

Applause Given: 220
Applause Received: 199

I can't say if I'd consider it a failure or not. I don't view a season that way, meaning you have to factor in coaching, health, luck, and execution, all factors we couldn't assess (yet). Raji demonstrated he's capable of playing at a high level, but if he fails this year, with the position change, that's on him. It's just one example of how it's difficult to attribute all success/failures at the feet of one coach or GM. Not to say you can't blame them for trends over time, I'm just saying why I couldn't say if I'd consider it ted's failure or not.
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
17 Pages«<1213141516>»
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Tweeter

Recent Topics
11m / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / luigis

1h / Random Babble / Smokey

2h / Super Bowl Talk / Smokey

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2h / Welcome to our Community! / wpr

3h / Around The NFL / wpr

3h / Fantasy Sports Talk / wpr

5h / Welcome to our Community! / Smokey

6h / Random Babble / Smokey

7h / Random Babble / wpr

7h / Random Babble / IronMan

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Gilligan

8h / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

8h / Random Babble / PackFanWithTwins


Copyright © 2006-2014 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.