Do you want Ted Thompson to be extended?· Page 5

DakotaT
Select Member

10 years ago

Because everyone agreed on everything for the first 6-7 years of this forum's existence...

We must have been coming here strictly for the aesthetics.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys

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

DoddPower
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#42

Would it be fair to say that part of you doesn't want to engage because you're fearful something will be replied that will have actually studied and reasoned your statements and concluded the exact opposite with facts in support?

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

No. I have countered with what I believe to be much more logical choices than two first rounders and a huge salary for Jimmy Graham. You have mostly ignored that.

But back on topic instead of this pointless non-sense. Yes, Ted Thompson should be extended. If the defense could improve, the Packers will be as much of a contender as anyone else in the league. It could really be as simple as one or two players taking a big step forward in their development.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#43

It is ironic that it's stated that I'm trying to get everyone to agree with me. It's the opposite. I want you to disagree so we can have a real debate. If you don't agree with me that's good theater, at least to me.

I knew most would say NO to Jimmy Graham and two 1st's...I knew the odds of Ted Thompson ever doing it were next to nil. However, I believe the idea is not crazy at all based on a study of the Packers history drafting stars in Round 1 over the last 40 years. The cap can be managed just fine in my detailed look at it and where we stand with room to make if we need to.

There is more irony to be found in the fact Dex can post a stat about yards per target and fumbles and he's got someone on the forum believing Boykin is as good as Jeffery and ready to start over Randall or Jordy. I get hammered for showing multiple angles and no mind is changed and I end up being ridiculed. Excuse me but that has some of the makings of a certain type of behavior that I would never want to get caught up in.

The majority of fans are total homers. The same applies here. I don't want to be a homer...I wish to be objective. I don't think my goal and many others goal is the same thing. That doesn't make me better, but it certainly makes me different. I know that I am and all the insults in the world the best ya got ring hollow. I do have a very low tolerance for those who say things that I think are ridiculous. IE: Sherrod has a 75% chance to be a player in my opinion. To me...that is an opinion with no basis in any form of reality anywhere at any time. He may be a perennial pro bowler for the next 10 seasons but that doesn't mean his odds, right now, are 75% he'll be a player for us so I showed swhat the odds were. MI disputed them. That's good...at least he looked. Most here would just insult me and tell me how stupid I am when I've actually spent time researching and studying an issue they have given 2 seconds of thought to but they know they're right and I'm crazy. Yes, I find this entertaining. How could I not?

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."

StarrMax1
Registered

10 years ago

#44

You are free to characterize me any way you see fit but I think you would have to agree my posts have more angles and underpinning to them than your own do.

It is very easy to rip someone. It is very easy to type one line simplistic posts. You are good at those. Can you craft one that features logic and ties things to other things? I don't know but you sure can try to diminish someone who can.

My logic may be beyond you...I don't know...I see a lot of insults and criticism hurled my way but actual counter reasoning is as thin as generic toilet paper and scarce as a good GM minus a stud QB in Green bay.

My guess is you have issues with me because you can't refute things you say you don't believe in. You don't agree with me but you don't have enough to back what you actually believe. You just state your belief and say that's what I believe as if that's some kind of logical well reasoned posting. It isn't. I work hard to not be as boring and simplistic as many are on these kind of forums. Those types of people are a dime a dozen. No sizzle, no depth, no nothing but insults for those who can do such things. This one is for StarrMax. [grin1]

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

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.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

10 years ago

#45

To each their own, I suppose. Disagreement is one thing. But ad nauseum upside-down logic is another.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower

I don't disagree with your point, but why even respond and fuel the fire then? It's like saying Bears are mean animals and then going up to one, poking it and then complain that it chased after you.

If someone says something "dumbass"-like, ignore it and move on. Why is this so difficult for us to do?

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#46

Originally Posted by: DoddPower

How many seasons are you going to wish for that to be true? When it finally hits, you'll say...see, I was right. I would say 3 completely failed defensive seasons is enough to show that probably isn't going to happen.

I haven't ignored it and you know that and to retain a shred of honor you added "for the most part" because I have acknowledged it...I just don't agree with it like you want me to. You can't show me very many stars we've drafted in Round 1 and you know that so you have to leave that alone.

How many seasons does Ted Thompson get to fix the D? This is season 4 after the SB... if it's bad, again, like I think it most likely will be is that enough for you? No. I don't think it is...we have Aaron so we always have a chance. How about we have Aaron and have the BEST chance...not just a chance. Any team in the March Madness field has a chance. Having Aaron Rodgers and a chance ain't enough. Ted Thompson has failed this TEAM.

Dispute the notion that he's built a terrible team but he drafted an all world QB. Can you? 2-5-1. Jacksonville North. A friend of mine who works for Mad Dog Radio on Sirius/XM called us that after Rodgers went down. He literally laughed at how pathetic the Packers were without Aaron Rodgers. Some of you act like 2-5-1 was a fluke and we're still a 13-3 team without Aaron. We're a Top 5 drafting team without Aaron Rodgers and Ted Thompson built us that way. Great QB...terrible team. Great QB carries terrible team. Does Ted Thompson give the one guy who can actually elevate us above the sucky team around him one superstar to help him out? No. We'll just lobby for another and another high pick to be thrown at our D and pray the draft and develop mantra produces a savior. Draft and Develop certainly hasn't done us any favors the last 3 years. How about instead of drafting and developing which may not work out.... why don't we go find us a star or two who is proven? You liked the Peppers signing didn't you? Guy could be completely finished. A Seth Joyner, Steve McMichael, Hardy Nickerson ... Julius may add his name to big name players that came to suck the Packers of some money and did nothing for us late in their careers.

I want to know...how long does Ted Thompson get? Does the one SB give him a lifetime of immunity?

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."

DakotaT
Select Member

10 years ago

#47

What did you guys do to Buckeye? I haven't seen him post in quite a while. He and Uffda would make great sparring partners.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#48

What did you guys do to Buckeye? I haven't seen him post in quite a while. He and Uffda would make great sparring partners.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT

We had some fun already. I miss Uncle Buck. Maybe, he is one of the two posters StarrToMax was referring to that had left the board "because of me". Isn't that something... I'm a crazy moron but I'm the reason they left? A crazy moron ran people off? No.

.

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."

DoddPower
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#49

[/h]

How many seasons are you going to wish for that to be true? When it finally hits, you'll say...see, I was right. I would say 3 completely failed defensive seasons is enough to show that probably isn't going to happen.

I haven't ignored it and you know that and to retain a shred of honor you added "for the most part" because I have acknowledged it...I just don't agree with it like you want me to. You can't show me very many stars we've drafted in Round 1 and you know that so you have to leave that alone.

How many seasons does Ted Thompson get to fix the D? This is season 4 after the SB... if it's bad, again, like I think it most likely will be is that enough for you? No. I don't think it is...we have Aaron so we always have a chance. How about we have Aaron and have the BEST chance...not just a chance. Any team in the March Madness field has a chance. Having Aaron Rodgers and a chance ain't enough. Ted Thompson has failed this TEAM.

Dispute the notion that he's built a terrible team but he drafted an all world QB. Can you? 2-5-1. Jacksonville North. A friend of mine who works for Mad Dog Radio on Sirius/XM called us that after Rodgers went down. He literally laughed at how pathetic the Packers were without Aaron Rodgers. Some of you act like 2-5-1 was a fluke and we're still a 13-3 team without Aaron. We're a Top 5 drafting team without Aaron Rodgers and Ted Thompson built us that way. Great QB...terrible team. Great QB carries terrible team. Does Ted Thompson give the one guy who can actually elevate us above the sucky team around him one superstar to help him out? No. We'll just lobby for another and another high pick to be thrown at our D and pray the draft and develop mantra produces a savior. Draft and Develop certainly hasn't done us any favors the last 3 years. How about instead of drafting and developing which may not work out.... why don't we go find us a star or two who is proven? You liked the Peppers signing didn't you? Guy could be completely finished. A Seth Joyner, Steve McMichael, Hardy Nickerson ... Julius may add his name to big name players that came to suck the Packers of some money and did nothing for us late in their careers.

I want to know...how long does Ted Thompson get? Does the one SB give him a lifetime of immunity?

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Considering it happened as recently as 2010, I don't think it's that unlikely to happen again. Although I will admin, I'm not a fan of Dom Capers. The Packers may not have the best talent on defense, but I think they have enough to be better than they have been most seasons. Also, as I said in another thread, the biggest limiting factor to me is injuries. I don't blame Ted Thompson for the injuries. The Packers were essentially a dropped interception away from beating the 49'ers in the playoffs last season, all while missing multiple key players. Those aren't bad odds to play each season.

I have more faith in Ted Thompson than I would some unnamed general manager you speak of. My faith lacks in player health and coaching more so than talent. I think the Packers have a enough talent to win any game.

Also, exactly how many teams are going to be great without their star quarterback? If you added a star quarterback to the Jaquars, they'd probably be pretty good, too. It's how the league works. The best buffer, in my opinion, is to have a great defense, which is why I think player health and the defense are MUCH higher priorities than an elite tight end.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#50

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.

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."

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

packerfanoutwest (37m) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (38m) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (50m) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (3h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (3h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (3h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (3h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (3h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (3h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (3h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (3h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (4h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (4h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (4h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (5h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (5h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (5h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (5h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (5h) : 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 (6h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (6h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (6h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (6h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (7h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (7h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (7h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (8h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (8h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (9h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (9h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (9h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (9h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (9h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (9h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (9h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (9h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (9h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (9h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (9h) : 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 (9h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (9h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (9h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (10h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (10h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (10h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (10h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (10h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (10h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (10h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (10h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

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