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
packerfanoutwest (7h) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.
Zero2Cool (7h) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat
wpr (7h) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.
wpr (7h) : now 3
Zero2Cool (8h) : Who? What?
beast (17h) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?
Martha Careful (22h) : meh
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast
wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!
dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am
wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days
beast (18-Apr) : 6 days
wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.
dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move
dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what
Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife
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
Recent Topics
2h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

17-Apr / Random Babble / wpr

16-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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