Bedard: No Excuses · PACKERSHOME

IronMan
Veteran Member Topic Starter

14 years ago

This team went 11-5 in the first year of a defensive scheme switch, led the league in sacks, had three cornerbacks go on injured reserve, got basically nothing from top pass rusher Aaron Kampman, the receivers dropped a ton of balls, and a starting safety was in and out of the lineup with no backup.

And the Packers decided to stay put (at least for now) in terms of personnel in perhaps the only uncapped year we'll ever see in the NFL going forward. Even on special teams. Certainly within their right. Not saying it's right or wrong, just pointing out what their decision was.

But like I've said before, this is a no excuses season. Everything's there for them. There's no reason why they shouldn't be one of the top teams in the league in offense and defense. And they could have done any number of things to improve their kicking games and overall special teams, and their functional depth. So when it's all said and done, if this Packers team does not go deep into the playoffs, they will have only themselves to blame. No excuses.

digsthepack
Registered

14 years ago

#2

And who are these free agent gems that could put us over the top?? I mean, it is a nice concept to say that they SHOULD have dropped some buck on game-changing FAs, but who is the safety we should have gone after? Any big-name FA punters who would have made a difference? What cornerback did we overlook that would be key to a deep playoff run?

The honest answer is most of this years VERY WEAK FA class were incredibly overrated. You do not throw huge jingle at people who are not amongst the best at their position.....and to my knowledge, none of the FAs were.

Please, correct me if I am wrong, but I don't recall ONE FA bantied about who could make meaningful contributions to this team.

State Motto: "Wisconsin, our serial murderers eat their kill!"

Pack93z
Select Member

14 years ago

#3

There was a couple of FA that might have fit well.. Ryan Clark comes to mind quickly.. but interest on both sides seemed cool if anything. Or a Chester Taylor that was overpaid for his fit in our offense.

IMO.. there wasn't a ton on the market that would mark a ton of improvement upon our team.

Now.. the lack of competition ( a thing this group hangs their hat upon) for Crosby is surprising.. and if he under performs yet again.. well they should have to answer for that. With no excuses..

Prior to Bulaga sliding in the draft or them selecting say a Saffold.. one move might have been Gaither out of Baltimore.. but one can hardly blame Ted Thompson and company for wanting to wait until after the draft for such a move..

I also think if you look at the NFL landscape this season.. there was a resounding statement made by most clubs.. which was a reduced market for UFA.. other than the teams stinking of desperation.. to name a couple of examples Chicago and Detroit.

Angelo and Smith know their window of employment depends solely on the 2010 season.. they are spending to try and save their collective asses. Detroit.. one could understand them gobbling up players in an effort to remake a roster that Millen basically ran into the muck then took a stick and buried it 10 feet deep for good measure.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

14 years ago

#4

I am getting really weary of these artificially set benchmarks set by sports writers and impatient fans. Last year, people (including lots of fans on this forum) were saying that Ted Thompson "had" to win a playoff game, or he should be gone. Now this year people are talking "Super Bowl or bust," as if Super Bowls are commodities that are handed out to a bunch of teams on a regular basis.

What nonsense.

Let's interject a little reality into this discussion, shall we?

Every year, a grand total of ONE team wins a Super Bowl. That means 31 teams do not. Should 31 managerial teams be relieved of duty every five years if they do not win the big dance? That would mean we'd have, guaranteed, at least 6 front offices being relieved every year! What patent absurdity.

Moving on. Since the Packers last won a Super Bowl in 1997, a grand total of 9 teams have won a Super Bowl. That's less than 1/3 of the league in 14 years. By the standards of this board and various sports writers, that means 23 front offices should have been relieved during this period for the gross negligence of having failed to notch a ring. Or perhaps they believe a different team should win the Super Bowl each year, in which case only 18 front offices "should" be on the chopping block. Again, obviously absurd.

Before we move on, read that again: only 9 teams have won a Super Bowl since the Packers last won one. Nine. A whopping 28%. This isn't something that happens everyday for every team, folks.

Since the Packers last won a Super Bowl, 18 teams (including the Packers in 1998) have played in the big game. Now that's a more impressive number -- 56% -- and perhaps makes a more reasonable benchmark of front office success. Still, it shows how difficult Super Bowl victories are. If it were as easy to reach the Super Bowl as some of you seem to think, on average, 28 teams (88% of the league) should have made it there in the past 14 years. But that's obviously not the case.

Now let's move on to the NFC Championship Game. Since the Packers last won the Super Bowl in 1997, 11 teams (including the Packers) have won an NFC Championship Game. That's 69% of the conference. If a new team took the crown every year, that would mean on average, 88% of the conference should have won one in the past 14 years. So it looks to me like the conference isn't all that terribly unbalanced. Interestingly, however, only 13 teams have played on the NFC Championship Game in the past 14 years: that means that with the exception of the Vikings and 49ers, every team that has played in the NFC Championship Game more than once has won it at least once, including the Packers, who've been there twice in the past 14 years -- including once in this current front office's tenure.

That bears repeating: The Packers have already been to the NFC Championship Game once in Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy's tenure here. Since Ted Thompson took the job in 2005, only 9 teams (56% of the conference) have made it to the NFC Championship Game. Two of those teams were the Seahawks and Packers, both of which he had a hand in assembling.

Finally, let's look at record: Last year, the Packers went 11-5. Only 4 teams in the league (13%) did better than that, and only two other teams equaled it. Fans of over 20 other teams would have killed to have the same record the Packers had last year, not to mention a playoff appearance.

Did I mention the Packers have been to the playoffs twice, including an overtime NFC Championship appearance, in their tenure?

The men are doing fine. Get off their back.

warhawk
Senior Member

14 years ago

#5

Thompson DID make off-season moves by resigning a fairly long list of players he definately could not afford to lose. That comes first and you can't go sign some big bucks player until you know what the guys you want to keep are going to cost.

What this does is puts essentially the same team back on the field with more quality depth behind them. I am fine with that. The defense is not in 101 mode and can now fine tune those concepts and the Oline was on the incline in the second half of the season. Now that line has more depth.

I know because of how it came down with Reggie a lot of people are looking for that recipe to be repeated but it's not the only one that can produce a SB winner. Besides, that was a scenario that did work in the case of Reggie White but has been retried and failed so many times with teams it's pathetic.

Some team is going to have 45 guys that elevates their game and the result will be a SB win. I didn't see any Reggie White on NO's team that was a determining factor in their success. They ALL came through and MANY players contributed in the clutch in MANY games.

It took NO four or five years to build that team and they started winning shootouts and coming back from from being double digits down, got momentum, and started to BELIEVE. A LOT of dynamics in how they became SB Champions.

And we're as poised to be those guys in 2010 as anybody.

"The train is leaving the station."

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

14 years ago

#6

I was one of them that said if we missed the playoffs again Ted and Mike would be on the hot seat.

I also said that I wanted to win a playoff game or I'd be disappointed. This coming off a 6 win season. lol

Now that the '09 season has concluded I feel a bit differently. I don't think theres any hot seat, except Mason Crosby (and I hope he burns his ass off) and I also think there's a lot of optimism going into the '10 season.

I've been saying it sometime now. The Packers will go deep. They will reach the Super Bowl and they will win. Barring of course any major injuries to key starters. That's how I feel.

What the Packers need is a chip on their shoulder. If we don't get that chip, I feel we won't have enough to put teams away. We need something big to group the team together. To unify everyone tighter. Some kind of adversity that will make the next guy want to kill someone for the guy next to him.

Unfortunately, I don't see that happening because some are picking the Packers to do so well.

Kingkoopa
Registered

14 years ago

#7

I am getting really weary of these artificially set benchmarks set by sports writers and impatient fans. Last year, people (including lots of fans on this forum) were saying that Ted Thompson "had" to win a playoff game, or he should be gone. Now this year people are talking "Super Bowl or bust," as if Super Bowls are commodities that are handed out to a bunch of teams on a regular basis.

What nonsense.

Let's interject a little reality into this discussion, shall we?

Every year, a grand total of ONE team wins a Super Bowl. That means 31 teams do not. Should 31 managerial teams be relieved of duty every five years if they do not win the big dance? That would mean we'd have, guaranteed, at least 6 front offices being relieved every year! What patent absurdity.

Moving on. Since the Packers last won a Super Bowl in 1997, a grand total of 9 teams have won a Super Bowl. That's less than 1/3 of the league in 14 years. By the standards of this board and various sports writers, that means 23 front offices should have been relieved during this period for the gross negligence of having failed to notch a ring. Or perhaps they believe a different team should win the Super Bowl each year, in which case only 18 front offices "should" be on the chopping block. Again, obviously absurd.

Before we move on, read that again: only 9 teams have won a Super Bowl since the Packers last won one. Nine. A whopping 28%. This isn't something that happens everyday for every team, folks.

Since the Packers last won a Super Bowl, 18 teams (including the Packers in 1998) have played in the big game. Now that's a more impressive number -- 56% -- and perhaps makes a more reasonable benchmark of front office success. Still, it shows how difficult Super Bowl victories are. If it were as easy to reach the Super Bowl as some of you seem to think, on average, 28 teams (88% of the league) should have made it there in the past 14 years. But that's obviously not the case.

Now let's move on to the NFC Championship Game. Since the Packers last won the Super Bowl in 1997, 11 teams (including the Packers) have won an NFC Championship Game. That's 69% of the conference. If a new team took the crown every year, that would mean on average, 88% of the conference should have won one in the past 14 years. So it looks to me like the conference isn't all that terribly unbalanced. Interestingly, however, only 13 teams have played on the NFC Championship Game in the past 14 years: that means that with the exception of the Vikings and 49ers, every team that has played in the NFC Championship Game more than once has won it at least once, including the Packers, who've been there twice in the past 14 years -- including once in this current front office's tenure.

That bears repeating: The Packers have already been to the NFC Championship Game once in Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy's tenure here. Since Ted Thompson took the job in 2005, only 9 teams (56% of the conference) have made it to the NFC Championship Game. Two of those teams were the Seahawks and Packers, both of which he had a hand in assembling.

Finally, let's look at record: Last year, the Packers went 11-5. Only 4 teams in the league (13%) did better than that, and only two other teams equaled it. Fans of over 20 other teams would have killed to have the same record the Packers had last year, not to mention a playoff appearance.

Did I mention the Packers have been to the playoffs twice, including an overtime NFC Championship appearance, in their tenure?

The men are doing fine. Get off their back.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Damn good post :grin:

blank

get_louder_at_lambeau
Registered

14 years ago

#8

+1 to Mr. Drivel. (I mean Nonstopdrivel, not the guy who gets paid to post drivel, nonstop, by the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.)

Mr. Bedard is a whiny little bitch, plain and simple. His blurb quoted above basically says that the Packers are in good shape to compete for a Championship, yet he somehow manages to say it in the bitchiest way possible, so he can position himself better to point his finger and say "I told you so!" if the Packers don't win it all this year.

Fuck you, Greg.

http://packersnews.net

Stevetarded
Registered

14 years ago

#9

There is no such thing as a "no excuses" season as he put it. There are plenty of reasons why the Packers may not go deep into the playoffs. If Rodgers somehow went down week 1 for the season would it still be Ted Thompson fault if they didn't win the superbowl?

This just seems kind of whiny like how some complain about the CB "depth" last year for Ted Thompson not having 7 starter quality CBs on the roster.

blank

djcubez
Senior Member

14 years ago

#10

I am getting really weary of these artificially set benchmarks set by sports writers and impatient fans. Last year, people (including lots of fans on this forum) were saying that Ted Thompson "had" to win a playoff game, or he should be gone. Now this year people are talking "Super Bowl or bust," as if Super Bowls are commodities that are handed out to a bunch of teams on a regular basis.

What nonsense.

Let's interject a little reality into this discussion, shall we?

Every year, a grand total of ONE team wins a Super Bowl. That means 31 teams do not. Should 31 managerial teams be relieved of duty every five years if they do not win the big dance? That would mean we'd have, guaranteed, at least 6 front offices being relieved every year! What patent absurdity.

Moving on. Since the Packers last won a Super Bowl in 1997, a grand total of 9 teams have won a Super Bowl. That's less than 1/3 of the league in 14 years. By the standards of this board and various sports writers, that means 23 front offices should have been relieved during this period for the gross negligence of having failed to notch a ring. Or perhaps they believe a different team should win the Super Bowl each year, in which case only 18 front offices "should" be on the chopping block. Again, obviously absurd.

Before we move on, read that again: only 9 teams have won a Super Bowl since the Packers last won one. Nine. A whopping 28%. This isn't something that happens everyday for every team, folks.

Since the Packers last won a Super Bowl, 18 teams (including the Packers in 1998) have played in the big game. Now that's a more impressive number -- 56% -- and perhaps makes a more reasonable benchmark of front office success. Still, it shows how difficult Super Bowl victories are. If it were as easy to reach the Super Bowl as some of you seem to think, on average, 28 teams (88% of the league) should have made it there in the past 14 years. But that's obviously not the case.

Now let's move on to the NFC Championship Game. Since the Packers last won the Super Bowl in 1997, 11 teams (including the Packers) have won an NFC Championship Game. That's 69% of the conference. If a new team took the crown every year, that would mean on average, 88% of the conference should have won one in the past 14 years. So it looks to me like the conference isn't all that terribly unbalanced. Interestingly, however, only 13 teams have played on the NFC Championship Game in the past 14 years: that means that with the exception of the Vikings and 49ers, every team that has played in the NFC Championship Game more than once has won it at least once, including the Packers, who've been there twice in the past 14 years -- including once in this current front office's tenure.

That bears repeating: The Packers have already been to the NFC Championship Game once in Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy's tenure here. Since Ted Thompson took the job in 2005, only 9 teams (56% of the conference) have made it to the NFC Championship Game. Two of those teams were the Seahawks and Packers, both of which he had a hand in assembling.

Finally, let's look at record: Last year, the Packers went 11-5. Only 4 teams in the league (13%) did better than that, and only two other teams equaled it. Fans of over 20 other teams would have killed to have the same record the Packers had last year, not to mention a playoff appearance.

Did I mention the Packers have been to the playoffs twice, including an overtime NFC Championship appearance, in their tenure?

The men are doing fine. Get off their back.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

+1 sir, that is good stuff.

Important Information: