Yes, the star QB makes a lot of difference. I would point to the NYG's ability to win the SB with their backup QB (Jeff Hostetler) How did they do that? They were a GREAT team. Green Bay is not a great team. That is the point. We're not very good and I don't think many fans care to think about or acknowledge it even if they have thought about it. I do think injuries play a role in all of this. At some point, you need to jettison injury risk players and find some who aren't Clay Matthews included.

Ted Thompson gets credit for Rodgers and blame for what he's put around him. I think that is more than fair. You think the team is talented enough to beat anyone. I think Rodgers is good enough to beat almost anyone at any time. Sadly, he has to play a game like he played at Atlanta in the playoffs to do it vs. the better teams. That will be what it takes for us to beat Seattle and I have believed we can go in opening night and win that one. He will have to be lights out because on the whole we aren't better than Seattle especially D vs. D.

This is TT's and MM's last hurrah in my book. If they fail and don't make the playoffs or go one and done it's time to clean house. 4 years of failure is enough. Ray Rhodes got one.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

So, we get rid of Thompson and replace him with whom exactly?

Originally Posted by: Mucky Tundra 

Get off your high horse, when are you going to realize, because most are now just flat out saying it straight to your face, you are a joke.

Nobody takes you serious, in fact, most are responding to you, just to get another dumbass reaction from you.

I thought you might realize that, when I started asking for studies and quotes on this subject.

I guess you just hold yourself at such a high esteem, you are thinking that everyone here just can't wait for your next response.

You are sadlley mistaken.

You think you have all this knowledge about football, and think you are somehow doing everyone on this forum a favor by spreading your crap around.

You find the posters on this forum boring and simplisctic?

Then why don't you move on?

There has to be other beings in this universe with your high intellect.

Go find them.

You bring nothing to this forum.

There is an internet word that describes you, I believe it is Troll.

I would say I can't wait for your response, but I'm not gonna screw with you anymore, nothing you say is relevant.

Originally Posted by: StarrMax1 

If you follow GMs and drafts, you know it takes a while to grade both of them as usually it takes time to get you players into the team and for them to develop. It usually takes AT LEAST two years, and they say it takes 3 years to fairly grade a draft. So Sherman best records as GM were mainly because of the GM before him carrying over into his time...

Same with the 4-12 record that happen in 2005 and 8-8 in 2006, they carried over from Sherman years as GM...


Sherman was very poor at the drafting, then again I've heard most coaches are because they get caught up with flashes of potential and get blinded and over look a ton of smaller/little things that make a good player other than just the exciting things such as speed...

Originally Posted by: beast 

So, let me get this straight....

When we went to the NFC Championship and lost in OT to the Giants that was a function of Mike Sherman the GM's greatness? That was 3 years after he was removed as GM.

Spin is fine...this spin just doesn't add up. 3 years later and Mike Sherman the GM's team is in the NFC Chip.

The fact remains... Mike Sherman the GM left the Packers as GM with a better record as Ted Thompson has now. Shermy had an old Brett Favre. Ted Thompson has/had a young Aaron Rodgers. Advantage Sherman as to record and Ted Thompson with QB situation.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 

You're the one spinning it... not me... I never said Sherman was anywhere close to great... but clearly you don't understand the role of GM. And yes Sherman's time as GM did effect the Packers 2007 season... how? Kampman, Corey Williams, Jenkins, Nick Barnett, Al Harris all played important roles in 2007 right? They were all added during Sherman's time as GM right? Therefor Sherman's time as GM did have an effect that year... as some players he added had a very important roles that year.

GM's role isn't always about right here and right now... it's also about the future. And what I said was, they (draft people) say it takes about 3 years for drafts to take effect... and most of Sherman's drafts were pretty poor, but he did add some very good players which pushed past him, just like Wolf's players (and Sherman's coaching) carried Sherman as GM for a while... until they figured out Sherman as GM was poor.

Originally Posted by: beast 

No we didn't. I've been shaking the tree for a long time.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT