Zero - I actually like them. Your idea?

---

Yeppers, wait, if it was does that mean you like it less?



lol


If old school is why the Packers are exciting to watch again, so be it. I don't agree with some of the things Ted has done, but I can't dispute the results. His moves/lack of moves have made OUR favorite team a helluva lot fun to watch again.

---

One thing I thought would be mentioned.. the way Rodgers has been brought along as an understudy for a couple of years is absolutely old school.. today we get so wound up to play these kids right away.. they struggle and they lose confidence in themselves.. never to return to what the once were in college or potentially in the pros.

Me personally.. think it is the best thing for a young QB.. hold the clipboard, learn the game from the sidelines and in camps.. then adjust to the speed of the game and then begin to start your career with most of the knowledge in your head.. now it is just getting the experience and letting the game come to you.. not as simple as it sounds, but I think the success rate would be much higher if young QB's were brought along this way.

For Aaron.. we will see shortly. He was brought into the game old school though.

---

Agreed pack93z, I'm truly excited for the opener. It was the best possible way for him to be brought along and now all he has to do is get the experience under his belt.

Hasselback was brought along that way and he made it to the SB. Let's hope it works for Aaron

---

So if Thompson had hired a crappy coach would you not hold him accountable? The hiring of a head coach is far and away the single most important decision that any GM makes.

---

How does being one of two teams to put an offer on the table (and the first, I should add) show no interest?

---

You keep trying, but it's not going anywhere. You can't make a trade in January, friend.

(*hint -- it's against the rules of the NFL 😉 )

---

First I read the article. If he doesn't pay Jennings and Kampman then he is a tightwad.

As far as Moss whom seems to be in this topic.

This talk about Randy Moss would of won us a Super Bowl is ridiculous. Reflect back on that game against the Giants. The tempo of the game was set by the Giants and the game wasn't going to be an air it out fest.

Here is why the Giants would of beaten us regardless of whether or not we had Moss and I was one of the biggest supporters of going out and getting Moss not only last off season but this off season too.

1. The Giants ran the ball. They weren't amazing at it but they were committed enough to it that the Packers defense had to stay true to stopping the run.

2. The Packers defense didn't get a good enough pass rush on Eli Manning. Does Randy Moss play DE now? That would be news to me.

3. Can Randy Moss cover Plaxico Burress?

Also you bring in Randy Moss and what happens to Greg Jennings and James Jones? Do they have the years they have? I don't think so. Jennings turned into a confident player last year. He wouldn't of had that confidence with Moss and Driver getting the throws all day.

The fact was Green Bay was 13-3 last year without Randy Moss. The last problem on the team was receivers. The receivers were outstanding.

No one player equals a Super Bowl. So this talk of Moss = a Super Bowl victory is really something.

---

February? March? I mean, it was like a year and a half ago so who cares but i am determined to win the argument 🙂

---

Name calling. Nice. Shows your maturity.......or lack of.

---