texaspackerbacker
11 years ago

You don't always get CM III. You just get a better chance of finding him in the higher rounds not in the 6th or 7th.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



hahahahahahahaha how many CMIIIs do you want anyway? You wake up a few years later with a headache of how to keep them and still fit with the salary cap hahahahaha.

I tend to agree with you, but I can't fire Ted Thompson and hire you just yet. Wait for him to have 5 or 10 years of bad teams, then I'll back you all the way hahahahaha.


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago

It doesn't work like that though. Ted Thompson isn't sitting there simply going "man I just want more picks even though there's some great players on the board, I'll just trade back anyways" If the players aren't there to get you cannot get them simple as that. Ted Thompson trusts the board and the scouts/evaluators. If the board says there's a bunch of guys of the same quality and no standout players then he's going to trade back and get one of those same quality players and add more chances late in the draft.

He's shown that if there's a significant player to trade up for he WILL do it so you cannot really claim he's avoiding that situation. You don't just trade up to get a player because "higher round picks have a better chance to work out" if your board doesn't say those players are worth it. On top of that each draft is different. Just because one year had a bunch of studs in the 2nd round doesn't mean the next year every 2nd rounder will be a stud ( they may all be a bust).

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



never did I say that Ted will always trade back. never did I say he avoids that situation. Obviously he has traded up several times. The point is he has traded back many more times than he has traded up.

You can't say that Ted "WILL do it" (trade up). He has done so so few times in his time as GM. No doubt the other franchises may have been asking for more than he was willing to give. As I said and then you said Ted puts more value on having 10 low level picks than on having 2-3 very higher picks. In his first couple of years when GB was in cap space hell. It made sense.

You are correct that every draft is different. I never said it wasn't. We only have to look at 2006 to see that when GB picked Hawk. He is not a bad player and fans would like him a whole lot better if GB got him in the 3rd round instead of #5 overall.

As for what the board says, you don't know what is on Ted's board. Some of the players that go in the early rounds are on his board. I never said he must trade up and give away every single low round draft pick every single year for me to be happy. I said Ted tends to go with lower picks more often than not. AND more often than not the lower round picks are not as good as the higher round picks.
If you want to be a winner put winners on the team. There are more winners in the higher rounds than in the lower ones.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago

hahahahahahahaha how many CMIIIs do you want anyway? You wake up a few years later with a headache of how to keep them and still fit with the salary cap hahahahaha.

I tend to agree with you, but I can't fire Ted Thompson and hire you just yet. Wait for him to have 5 or 10 years of bad teams, then I'll back you all the way hahahahaha.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



OH MY!!! let's not stock the team with quality players. We may have to pay them money some day down the road in 3-4 years.

I don't want the job. "If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve."

To answer your question- I want 22 CM 3 type players.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago
To tie my rant back in to Zero's title- I want a team that wins in the playoffs not one that merely shows up and then goes home a week or two later. I guess some of you are happy with it. I am ok with you liking a form of mediocrity.
I measure success by championships.
UserPostedImage
texaspackerbacker
11 years ago

To tie my rant back in to Zero's title- I want a team that wins in the playoffs not one that merely shows up and then goes home a week or two later. I guess some of you are happy with it. I am ok with you liking a form of mediocrity.
I measure success by championships.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



What's that expression: "Don't let good be the enemy of great" or something like that ....... I empathize completely with your point of view, but I'm pretty damn happy with the type of "mediocrity" we have had also. Ted Thompson seems to be trying for a middle course - going for it all with a minimum risk of dropping off from the great place we already are. This might just be the year we really do have it ALL.

And my half serious point about too many CMIIIs was that you bump up against the salary cap if you have too many superstars to get re-signed.


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
steveishere
11 years ago

To tie my rant back in to Zero's title- I want a team that wins in the playoffs not one that merely shows up and then goes home a week or two later. I guess some of you are happy with it. I am ok with you liking a form of mediocrity.
I measure success by championships.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



That's nice and all but every team but 2 goes home a week or two later every year. I guess the sooner you realize the team you like isn't going to be one of the 2 out of 32 teams that makes the big game every single year (no matter what team you like) the easier it will be for you. You are putting up unrealistic expectations. Obviously every fan want's their team to win the Superbowl every year, wanting that doesn't make you special but demanding that makes you irrational.
DakotaT
11 years ago

see THAT is the point. Get rid of the more or less useless low round picks and spend them on quality higher round picks. You get so much more value with higher picks. You get what you pay for.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Uncle Ted gave us a championship with the multiple draft pick system and you question it? Drafting in the late 20's in every round every year and still being a top team annually comes from having a very skilled GM. Maybe we should all just kiss his ass a little more instead of questioning his methods and pouting about more championships.

We had a GM that always thought we were 1 or 2 players away and that didn't pan out too well.
UserPostedImage
nerdmann
11 years ago

That's nice and all but every team but 2 goes home a week or two later every year. I guess the sooner you realize the team you like isn't going to be one of the 2 out of 32 teams that makes the big game every single year (no matter what team you like) the easier it will be for you. You are putting up unrealistic expectations. Obviously every fan want's their team to win the Superbowl every year, wanting that doesn't make you special but demanding that makes you irrational.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



If we played above our abilities and still lost in the NFCC, that would be cool.

But when we are the superior team and we shit ourselves, it disgusts me.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago



And my half serious point about too many CMIIIs was that you bump up against the salary cap if you have too many superstars to get re-signed.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



wouldn't THAT be a great problem to have? I would never worry about it. The answer is simple. Use them while you have them and then let a few or most walk when the time comes. No worries.

To everyone else- HA! You are getting WAY to worked up over this. Like Dakota mentioned we are only talking about a 1-2 maybe 3 player difference in the team and you are pummeling me for nothing.

I do not hate Uncle Teddy. I think he has done a heck of a job. however we have been discussing in general. Let's get specific. Who feels that it would have been better to have Darius Butler, Derek Cox and Brandon Tate on the Packers instead of Clay? Oops Clay AND Jamon Meredith. Certainly Butler, Cox and Tate have had decent careers. For the most part. Nothing spectacular. But they line up and play week end and week out. Moving up in the draft gives you a better chance at a Pro Bowl caliber player than moving down in the draft. Not a one of you can disagree with that. Just look at the wiki drafts for the past 10 years. More All Pro and Pro Bowl players are taken in the early rounds than the later ones.

Since Uncle Ted does a great job of stocking the team the need to pluck a couple of studs from time to time in lue of 10 more guys who are just passing through is required.

As for the line about measuring success based on championships- is that not Mike Mc Carthy's quote? or a paraphrased version of it?
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
11 years ago
If we are going to "blame" the composition of the roster for our post season failure.. then we best remember it was those same type of players that netted us a ring in 2010.

We have talent up and down this roster.. talent is not the problem.

I still maintain.. I will continue to, point most of the blame of our post season failures on our imbalance in offensive play calling.. IE, failing to develop a running game to balance our offense and our team.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (39m) : Fake news. Cowboys say no
Zero2Cool (1h) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.
beast (15h) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
beast (15h) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you
wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious
beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere
beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.
beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.
beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...
beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered
wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.
wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.
wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.
Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet
beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury
beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State
beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Oh snap!!!
Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : Even Stevie Wonder can see that.
Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : Nah, you see Lions OC leaving to be HC of Bears is directly related to Packers.
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ohhhhhhh Zero is in TROUBLE
packerfanoutwest (21-Jan) : Zero, per your orders, check Bearshome, not packershome
Zero2Cool (20-Jan) : Then he'll land with another team and flourish.
Zero2Cool (20-Jan) : Ben going to Bears. He'll be out in 3 years.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
22-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

22-Jan / Random Babble / packerfanoutwest

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.