play2win
10 years ago

Taking risks according to whom? The ESPN and NFL Network analysts? They do not represent the reality of how NFL teams actually feel. NFL teams have entire scouting departments. I don't think most of his picks are risks at all, in their opinion. They are just the players they feel are best to select at that position in the draft. Some fans put too much stock in analyst rankings. Also, Ted Thompson has made some pretty "safe" picks in terms of popular rankings in the first rounds the past few seasons.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 



Wow! Not a better post on the subject. Excellent point.

While all the stuff we do as fans who like the draft and all the speculation for however many months, there really is nothing to beat a chest about. We are getting just a small fraction of info, compared to what the professionals have in making very important decisions for their teams.

Millions of dollars ride on every player. Millions. The resources poured into these decisions are immense.
beast
10 years ago

Ted Thompson tries to outsmart everyone by picking these weird picks. I think he gets off on taking someone ala Khryi Thornton and having everyone go WTF? I understand the compulsion to be different and make a pick everyone goes WOW over but this basically means he bypasses the more commonly thought to be talent for the heroic Favre play... which often fail.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I think you're making a HUGE assumption... that assumption would be Thompson gives two cent about what others think. Which I believe is fans being egotistical, trying to imply what we think would matter to a GM when really he probably doesn't care ... at all.... what we think.

I think these "weird picks" are truly who Thompson and the Packers feel is the best player/PERSON available FOR THEM. And they just seem "weird" because we as fans weren't expecting them. But that doesn't mean the weird picks aren't the right ones.

I remember people saying drafting some kid named Aaron Rodgers was weird for a team that needs to get better targets and defense. As I turns out it was also the best player/person available for their team.



I've heard people complain that DT Khyri Thornton and LB Carl Bradford were "weird picks" but the fact of the matter is both are talented one gap players, which is rumored to be the new style of defense the Packers are going to.

As far as Khyri Thornton goes, he played on a horrible team which won one game in two years and was the main target for offenses to stop and so they double teamed him early and often. And mock draft people didn't really like him because he didn't make enough flashy plays as offenses focused on stopping him and keeping the ball away from him. Yet one of the better NFL scouting teams (if not best) with a pretty good track record grabbed him and we're questioning the team; instead of the mock draft people? To me that makes no sense.

Most likely is he just wasn't flashy enough for mock draft people so they over looked him, considering they're just there for te entertainment value... that's all the are... they don't have to live with the result. As long as people tune in to watch them they could be 100% and keep their jobs were as scouts, GMs and teams have to live with it.
UserPostedImage
+2
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
10 years ago



I remember people saying drafting some kid named Aaron Rodgers was weird for a team that needs to get better targets and defense. As I turns out it was also the best player/person available for their team.

Originally Posted by: beast 



very very few experts thought GB should pass on Aaron once they saw that e fell into their lap. Certainly they needed immediate help at other positions but anyone who knew anything recognized GB needed to pick up their QB of the future in 2005 or 2006 at the latest. Getting the QB was as important if not more so at that point.
UserPostedImage
beast
10 years ago
I remember people saying drafting some kid named Aaron Rodgers was weird for a team that needs to get better targets and defense. As I turns out it was also the best player/person available for their team.


very very few experts thought GB should pass on Aaron

Originally Posted by: wpr 



I said "people", not experts... and a lot of Packers fans seemed pretty upset with the drafting of Rodgers. As they wanted to get Favre another shot, not grab his replacement.

but anyone who knew anything recognized GB needed to pick up their QB of the future in 2005 or 2006 at the latest.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



I'm not disagreeing with what you said, but that seems like re-writing it to make it seem better than what it truly was (which happens a lot it seems). After the 2005 1st round, a lot of Packers fans (including those who knew and recognized a lot) were upset as the Packers were looking more towards the future than getting Favre another weapon and another shot at winning the title, and I remember some continued to talk negative about Rodgers as he didn't look good in training camp the first two years.

UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
10 years ago
It isn't a HUGE assumption at all...TT said it himself... he likes to try and find the guy that other teams don't find. He doesn't enjoy drafting the expected talent.

Here's my example of how I perceive TT's mind to work. Adrian Peterson is available to be drafted and we're on the clock? Hmmm... Yeah, I could take AD, he's pretty good, but I kinda like this kid from the Quinnipiac intramural team that a guy who sacked my groceries at the Piggly Wiggly told me about.

I truly believe taking Clinton Dix was absolutely no fun for him. He would've much rather have found the next size speed project out of Maine ala Jerron McMillian. He's wired to do things like that and he said as much. I get that... however, do it with the UDFA's and leave the rest of it alone in the actual draft. I love that Ted Thompson finds talent late or as UDFA's... I just don't like him going with the "I'm smarter than you" kind of picks earlier. Minnesota seems to go with consensus guys early...and they've been more successful than us way up high. Yes, they've had their Ponder's... Moss, Harvin, AD, Patterson... guys who are difference makers and change games. Hard pressed to find 4 better going back 30 years for the Packers in the 1st round.

For the record, I was dancing when we took Rodgers...he was my favorite college QB of all time. I remember watching him in college and lamenting we'd never be terrible enough to get up high enough to draft him. I used to tell people he'd be better than Brett Favre and I'd get laughed at. What a draft day that was...one of my favorites. I can't imagine where we'd be if Ted Thompson hadn't made that pick.



UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


mi_keys
10 years ago

Here's my example of how I perceive TT's mind to work. Adrian Peterson is available to be drafted and we're on the clock? Hmmm... Yeah, I could take AD, he's pretty good, but I kinda like this kid from the Quinnipiac intramural team that a guy who sacked my groceries at the Piggly Wiggly told me about.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Poor wind up attempt. 3/10. Try again.
Born and bred a cheesehead
+1
steveishere
10 years ago

It isn't a HUGE assumption at all...TT said it himself... he likes to try and find the guy that other teams don't find. He doesn't enjoy drafting the expected talent.

Here's my example of how I perceive TT's mind to work. Adrian Peterson is available to be drafted and we're on the clock? Hmmm... Yeah, I could take AD, he's pretty good, but I kinda like this kid from the Quinnipiac intramural team that a guy who sacked my groceries at the Piggly Wiggly told me about.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Worst analogy/example ever? Yeah, probably.

I truly believe taking Clinton Dix was absolutely no fun for him. He would've much rather have found the next size speed project out of Maine ala Jerron McMillian. He's wired to do things like that and he said as much. I get that... however, do it with the UDFA's and leave the rest of it alone in the actual draft. I love that Ted Thompson finds talent late or as UDFA's... I just don't like him going with the "I'm smarter than you" kind of picks earlier. Minnesota seems to go with consensus guys early...and they've been more successful than us way up high. Yes, they've had their Ponder's... Moss, Harvin, AD, Patterson... guys who are difference makers and change games. Hard pressed to find 4 better going back 30 years for the Packers in the 1st round.

For the record, I was dancing when we took Rodgers...he was my favorite college QB of all time. I remember watching him in college and lamenting we'd never be terrible enough to get up high enough to draft him. I used to tell people he'd be better than Brett Favre and I'd get laughed at. What a draft day that was...one of my favorites. I can't imagine where we'd be if Ted Thompson hadn't made that pick.



Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



That doesn't mesh at all with his history of 1st round picks. Hawk, Raji, Bulaga,Sherrod, Perry, Datone Jones were all consensus/no-brainer type of guys at their spots in the draft.
+2
play2win
10 years ago

It isn't a HUGE assumption at all...TT said it himself... he likes to try and find the guy that other teams don't find. He doesn't enjoy drafting the expected talent.

Here's my example of how I perceive TT's mind to work. Adrian Peterson is available to be drafted and we're on the clock? Hmmm... Yeah, I could take AD, he's pretty good, but I kinda like this kid from the Quinnipiac intramural team that a guy who sacked my groceries at the Piggly Wiggly told me about.

I truly believe taking Clinton Dix was absolutely no fun for him. He would've much rather have found the next size speed project out of Maine ala Jerron McMillian. He's wired to do things like that and he said as much. I get that... however, do it with the UDFA's and leave the rest of it alone in the actual draft. I love that Ted Thompson finds talent late or as UDFA's... I just don't like him going with the "I'm smarter than you" kind of picks earlier. Minnesota seems to go with consensus guys early...and they've been more successful than us way up high. Yes, they've had their Ponder's... Moss, Harvin, AD, Patterson... guys who are difference makers and change games. Hard pressed to find 4 better going back 30 years for the Packers in the 1st round.

For the record, I was dancing when we took Rodgers...he was my favorite college QB of all time. I remember watching him in college and lamenting we'd never be terrible enough to get up high enough to draft him. I used to tell people he'd be better than Brett Favre and I'd get laughed at. What a draft day that was...one of my favorites. I can't imagine where we'd be if Ted Thompson hadn't made that pick.



Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 


I agree on Rodgers. At the time I was thinking getting him at #24 in 2005 could not have been better timing, as Favre had been throwing the retirement thing out there for 3 years. This coming from a guy who desperately wanted to give him more weapons to seal another deal.

As for the rest, I tend to agree on some of that too. At least, that was my thinking with the Thornton and Rodgers picks initially. I'm sure you felt that way with the Adams pick, but I don't, especially after hearing his comments recently, saying they were putting a premium on the receivers who had the very best hands.

Thornton brings some very interesting qualities too, that make me think this was far more targeted than an average flier/risk-reward selection. He plays every position on the line, has great size, exceptional hand work, great speed, and was a steady riser on many draft boards. The latter a component we lay people were not privy to.

I thought Ted did FAR better the last half of our draft, especially with what I've learned after the fact. Seems like he really ramped up the back end of our last few drafts after those abysmal 2011 and 2012 back end offerings.

http://www.packers.com/history/draft-history.html 
+1
beast
10 years ago

It isn't a HUGE assumption at all...TT said it himself... he likes to try and find the guy that other teams don't find. He doesn't enjoy drafting the expected talent.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Yes it is a huge assumption and it seems you made two more within this statement.
Ted Thompson said he likes to find hidden gems, you assume that means he also likes to draft them high like you're suggesting. Personally you can wait and let the hidden gems fall to you (like Josh Sitton, I still have NO CLUE how that guy wasn't given a combine invite, he was on my little poor draft radar well before the combine). and let them fall to you.

Again Ted Thompson said he likes to find hidden gems, you assume that's telling you something... if you can name a single GM or scout that doesn't like finding hidden gems that I can show you someone that doesn't like doing their job... because that's basically the job, turning over ever prospect you can find and evaluating them. If your an NFL GM or scout and don't like looking for hidden gems then you have the wrong job.

Thompson is doing what Thompson always has done... speaking enough to get the media and NFL off his back, while saying nothing of importance or meaning, only stating the obvious... which makes people want to read between the lines when there is nothing between the lines to read.


I truly believe taking Clinton Dix was absolutely no fun for him. He would've much rather have found the next size speed project out of Maine ala Jerron McMillian. He's wired to do things like that and he said as much.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



He didn't say that at all... NOT AT ALL!

I truly believe you're mentally going crazy over how you struggling to figure out what is going through Thompson mind to the point where you're reading what he says and going off on wild assumptions.


UserPostedImage
+3
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
10 years ago

I remember people saying drafting some kid named Aaron Rodgers was weird for a team that needs to get better targets and defense. As I turns out it was also the best player/person available for their team.




I said "people", not experts... and a lot of Packers fans seemed pretty upset with the drafting of Rodgers. As they wanted to get Favre another shot, not grab his replacement.



I'm not disagreeing with what you said, but that seems like re-writing it to make it seem better than what it truly was (which happens a lot it seems). After the 2005 1st round, a lot of Packers fans (including those who knew and recognized a lot) were upset as the Packers were looking more towards the future than getting Favre another weapon and another shot at winning the title, and I remember some continued to talk negative about Rodgers as he didn't look good in training camp the first two years.

Originally Posted by: beast 



Since when do we give any credence to "people"? First thing to remember is that a huge segment of Packer fans were not really Packer fans. They were favorites who worshiped at the altar of Kiln so the impression that you are thinking about is tainted at best.

So for me I am not rewriting history. (I know you are not implying that I am.) The day before the draft I would have been looking at other players. When Aaron fell THAT far there was only one player I wanted. I don't know why there even had to be a discussion. The only reason GB delayed making the selection was to wait and see if another team was going to offer them a ton of draft picks.
UserPostedImage
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    beast (20m) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
    beast (21m) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
    Zero2Cool (10h) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
    Zero2Cool (10h) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
    dfosterf (12h) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
    Zero2Cool (13h) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
    dfosterf (14h) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
    Zero2Cool (14h) : Thank you
    wpr (14h) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
    wpr (14h) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
    Zero2Cool (14h) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
    wpr (14h) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.
    dfosterf (14h) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.
    Zero2Cool (15h) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.
    Zero2Cool (15h) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.
    Martha Careful (15h) : just kidding...it was down
    Martha Careful (15h) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor
    dfosterf (15h) : 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.
    Mucky Tundra (20-Jan) : what's so funny?
    Zero2Cool (20-Jan) : BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    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
    34 - 0
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    25 - 27
    Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    22 - 24
    Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
    Eagles
    10 - 22
    Recent Topics
    9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    14h / 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