Ted Thompson expected criticism for drafting Aaron Rodgers

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

13 years ago

This is what Bob Harlan recalled on the day the Packers selected Aaron Rodgers.

Every year, just before he’d make the No. 1 draft choice, he would always call me out of the room. And he would tell me who he was going to take and why. And I can still remember our conversation about Aaron Rodgers. He said, ‘I can’t believe the guy has fallen this far, but he’s there. We may catch some heat, because with Brett (Favre) here we’re taking a quarterback.’ But he said, ‘He’s the best player on the board and I’m going to take him.’

Bob Harlan wrote:

And here is what Ted Thompson's philosophy is on building a team through the words of Bob Harlan.

'When we’re in the draft room, my responsibility is to build the entire team. So he said, ‘If we’re deep at wide receiver and say I pass up a couple of great wide receivers, and the second game of the season, we lose a couple people at that position, I’m going to be kicking myself the rest of the year that I didn’t stick to my pattern and take those wide receivers.’ So he said, ‘I’m going to take the top player on the board, regardless of what position he plays, because my responsibility is to build the entire football team.’

Bob Harlan wrote:

It's hard to question if the Packers truly take the best player available after reading that.

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

Greg C.
Registered

13 years ago

I think now that the team has been built up, they are a little less BPA (best player available) than they used to be, though that is definitely their overall approach. I liked this quote too. Thompson said this to Bob Harlan:

"Bob I’m not going to go out in April and sign a bunch of free agents and spend a lot of money just to please the fans and then regret it in November when they’re sitting on the bench and not contributing. We’re not going to operate that way.”

blank

PackerTraxx
Senior Member

13 years ago

Personally, I've always been an advocate of BPA so I like how Ted Thompson operates with the draft. Rookies are seldom ready to consistently have an impact unless you're a bad team drafting in the top 5-10. Thinking long term is more impotant. We've been fortunate the last few years that the best player was also something we could use ie. Raji, Bulaga and Sherrod. Also, we have not made any glaring mistakes ala Jamaal Reynolds, Ahmad Carroll etc.

Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?

wpr
Preferred Member

13 years ago

I have been surprised at some of the picks Uncle Ted has made but that is because i do not know a whole lot about the college talent. I can't fault the BPA concept unless there are extenuating circumstances.
I was thrilled when they selected Rodgers. He was a gift. I did not expect him to put up numbers like he is doing this year. But I remember experts for years and years say that it takes 3 years to develop a NFL QB. And that was before the passing craze we see today. I "assumed" Brett would be in GB for those 3 developmental years. And if Brett was able to make it a 4th year that was fine too. In my mind if worked perfectly.

Dexter_Sinister
Registered

13 years ago

)

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

13 years ago

At the time, I would have been OK with Favre retiring after '06. Rodgers was ready in '07.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister

Aaron Rodgers was barely ready to take over in '08. That '07 season helped me a lot. It showed him how handle winning. Without that learning, and all that experience he gained, I'm surprised anyone thinks he was ready in '07. Then again, if you didn't see him practicing or during the pre-season, it is expected.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

13 years ago

Aaron Rodgers was barely ready to take over in '08.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

I beg to differ. Any man who can throw for 4038 yards (4th) with an average of 7.5 ypa (9th), 28 TDs (3rd) against 13 INTs (18th), a 63.8% completion percentage (10th) for a rating of 93.8 (6th), despite being sacked 34 times (5th), is more than ready to take over.

The biggest objection that could be raised to his play that year was that he held onto the ball too long.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

13 years ago

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel

Anyone can throw stats up there and take them out of context to try and "prove" their fallacy. Fact is, Brett Favre made those receivers and Aaron Rodgers just fell into a really great situation because of it.

mi_keys
Senior Member

13 years ago

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

I'm guessing you're on a windup because I've heard that last bit before from a recent interview somewhere.

Born and bred a cheesehead

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

13 years ago

#10

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

That statement is so wrong on so many levels I can't take it seriously. If you are being sarcastic, then follow your own rule. If you are being a dick because you're mad about something I said recently, at least have the decency to admit to it.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (4m) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (13m) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (25m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (1h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (1h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (4h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (4h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (4h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (4h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (4h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (4h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (4h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (4h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (4h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (4h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (4h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (4h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (4h) : Packers will get in

beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (5h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (5h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (8h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (8h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (8h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (18h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (18h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS