uffda udfa
10 years ago

I cannot believe that we’re still debating Ted Thompson after four division titles, six playoff appearances, and a record (including playoffs) of 92-62-1. And there’s this little thing called the Super Bowl that the team won in 2010. Ted Thompson should and will stay as long as he likes.

As for the makeup of the current teams, I feel good. I guess I’m in the minority. I don’t know. It appears there’s worry here. I did not like the team last year. Maybe it was my Spidey Sense (if I have one) that told me to be pessimistic. I had the Packers going 9-7 in my NFL preview that year.

For whatever it’s worth, I have the Pack going 12-4. Frankly, I could see 13 or 14 wins. People are all on Seattle and San Francisco, but I think Green Bay and New Orleans are going to remind everybody that those are the two NFC teams with the best quarterbacks in the conference. I’m more concerned about whether the team can remain healthy. If they do, then they are Super Bowl contenders.

Originally Posted by: porky88 



Your entire post can be countered with: Mike Sherman had a better winning % as GM than Ted Thompson has now. Did you want him to stay on as GM. I didn't. I don't on Ted Thompson despite his almost better winning % than Mike Sherman.



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."


beast
10 years ago

Your entire post can be countered with: Mike Sherman had a better winning % as GM than Ted Thompson has now. Did you want him to stay on as GM. I didn't. I don't on Ted Thompson despite his almost better winning % than Mike Sherman.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 




Which is very misleading... which is why you can't fairly look at it that way. It takes two or more (they say it takes 3 years to judge a draft class)... but Sherman's GM winning % is more because of Wolf as GM players than Sherman's... giving undue credit there... to Sherman when it was Wolf's players.

And Thompson GM years had a couple of bad years to start out because of the bad job Sherman did as GM of keeping players... GM's aren't able to change things right away... so the whole Sherman has a better winning % as GM is redherring bull...



UserPostedImage
porky88
10 years ago

Which is very misleading... which is why you can't fairly look at it that way. It takes two or more (they say it takes 3 years to judge a draft class)... but Sherman's GM winning % is more because of Wolf as GM players than Sherman's... giving undue credit there... to Sherman when it was Wolf's players.

And Thompson GM years had a couple of bad years to start out because of the bad job Sherman did as GM of keeping players... GM's aren't able to change things right away... so the whole Sherman has a better winning % as GM is redherring bull...

Originally Posted by: beast 


To get into some of the specifics as to what you're eluding to...

Ron Wolf built the offensive line, which was the foundation of the Mike Sherman Era. Wolf drafted Chad Clifton, Mark Tauscher, Marco Rivera, Mike Wahle, and Mike Flanagan. Wolf traded for Brett Favre and Ahman Green. He drafted Donald Driver and Bubba Franks. That pretty much sums up the offense during Mike Sherman’s tenure as general manager. Defensively, Wolf drafted Darren Sharper and KGB, who were the two most productive defensive players in that time.

Speaking of Wolf, he was GM for nine seasons in Green Bay and the Packers were 92-52. Thompson just finished his ninth season with 86 regular-season wins. Each won one Super Bowl. Does anybody think it was a good thing for Wolf to step down when he did?
Dexter_Sinister
10 years ago

People are quick to use them as the business model because A) the 49ers have had the Packers number of late. 2) the Seahawks won it all last year and lastly they are viewed as the top two teams in the NFC. All of which may be true but that does not mean it will remain true in 2014.

I usually hate the what if game but what would happen if Packers won the SB this season and defeated the Seahawks and 49ers in the process? I'll tell you what would happen. People would be looking at the Packers as the business model and the Seahawks and 49ers would be relegated to the better try harder next season column.

Originally Posted by: sschind 



They have not really had the Packers number of late. The last game was won by a FG after a dropped INT that would have sealed it.

With half the D injured.

The 49ers have edged the Packers lately. They have not owned them or dominated them. The Packers actually had 4th quarter leads in the last 2 games.
I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
sschind
10 years ago

They have not really had the Packers number of late. The last game was won by a FG after a dropped INT that would have sealed it.

With half the D injured.

The 49ers have edged the Packers lately. They have not owned them or dominated them. The Packers actually had 4th quarter leads in the last 2 games.

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister 



I agree with all your excuses but to me it comes down to the fact that the last 4 games were 4 losses for the Packers. Were they close? Sure. Have the Packers had chances to win a few of them? Yes. Did they? No. To me that means San Fran has their number. To you it doesn't. So be it. Eventually (hopefully starting in 2014) it will swing the other way for a while. That's the way it goes. It's not a big deal unless you are one of those who like to rub it in to other fans that we beat them x number of times in a row and are afraid to admit it when your team goes on a losing streak against a particular team.

Pack93z
10 years ago
To the OP.. hell yes. Next question. [grin1]
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
uffda udfa
10 years ago

To get into some of the specifics as to what you're eluding to...

Ron Wolf built the offensive line, which was the foundation of the Mike Sherman Era. Wolf drafted Chad Clifton, Mark Tauscher, Marco Rivera, Mike Wahle, and Mike Flanagan. Wolf traded for Brett Favre and Ahman Green. He drafted Donald Driver and Bubba Franks. That pretty much sums up the offense during Mike Sherman’s tenure as general manager. Defensively, Wolf drafted Darren Sharper and KGB, who were the two most productive defensive players in that time.

Speaking of Wolf, he was GM for nine seasons in Green Bay and the Packers were 92-52. Thompson just finished his ninth season with 86 regular-season wins. Each won one Super Bowl. Does anybody think it was a good thing for Wolf to step down when he did?

Originally Posted by: porky88 



I went over this... Where were the Packers 3 years after Sherman was fired as GM? In an NFC Championship game they lost by a FG in OT. So, who is responsible for the team that was on the field that day? It can't be Ted Thompson if it takes 3 years blah, blah, blah...it would be Mike Sherman's team on the field as he left 3 years before that game. Ted Thompson would not get credit for it under your formula of waiting 3 years to judge. Sherman gets the credit for that NFC Championship appearance under your scenario. So, with Ted's team, we had one magical SB run, which was no doubt glorious, and one win vs. a Joe Webb Viking led team in the playoffs. We've made the playoffs that many times with TT's team and have gone one and done way too often. Our team obviously doesn't have a very good chance if the majority of it's playoff appearances ended in one and done. Being one and done is a major failure...one that should be unacceptable. When the same team ends your season, twice in a row, when you have the better QB is even more of a failure.

No way on this earth I extend Ted Thompson until after this season... if we bow out in Round 1...or don't make the playoffs it's time for both Mike McCarthy and Ted Thompson to go. 4 straight years of playoff failure is not good enough.

Tom Brady has 4 SuperBowl appearances and SIX AFC Championship appearances.

I think many of us feel Aaron is Brady's equal if not superior in terms of talent. Clearly, our TEAM isn't very good around Aaron or he'd be wracking up the kind of numbers Brady has in the post season. Aaron has ONE NFC Championship appearance as a starter under TT. Brady has SIX. Brady was a 3 time SB winner before he was 28. Aaron is 30 now and has but one appearance in a SB or Conference championship as a starter. Again, Brady 4 Rodgers 1 in SB's. Brady 6 Rodgers 1 in championship game appearances.

Meanwhile, I believe many Packers fans have overestimated our "greatness" one Conference championship vs. 6 of Tom Brady. Further, Colin Kaepernick has been to 2 NFC championships in back to back years...already more than Aaron Rodgers. How you think we should stick with this plan we're on is baffling to me...Aaron's career will be over soon and we'll all get to talk about one SB like we did with Brett. Spare me the talk about how tough it is to get to the SB. Brady has been there 4 times... Big Ben has been there several times. Rodgers...ONCE. Not good enough...not even close. Ted Thompson has failed with the greatest passer of all time to give him a team to get to 2nd SB much less get out of the first freaking round. How you're content and happy with this stuff is mindboggling. Again, NFC Championship appearances as a starter... Kaepernick 2 Rodgers 1.
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."


Pack93z
10 years ago
Here is what I would like to see happen in Green Bay over the next ~ 5 - 7 years.

Being the Thompson is only 61 years old.. have him man the ship for at least 5 more years.

Continue the maturation of Eliot Wolf with him taking the reigns after Thompson's departure. Eliot is currently 31 years old and been scouting players since 14, set the table up with a strong staff around him and let him assume control.

Wolf to Thompson and back to a Wolf. Stability and philosophy developed over generations of leadership.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
uffda udfa
10 years ago

Here is what I would like to see happen in Green Bay over the next ~ 5 - 7 years.

Being the Thompson is only 61 years old.. have him man the ship for at least 5 more years.

Continue the maturation of Eliot Wolf with him taking the reigns after Thompson's departure. Eliot is currently 31 years old and been scouting players since 14, set the table up with a strong staff around him and let him assume control.

Wolf to Thompson and back to a Wolf. Stability and philosophy developed over generations of leadership.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 



Do we know what Eliot Wolf's philosophy is? It may not be anything like TT's or his father's.

I'll take the potential instability a non Wolf can bring us if it can bring us to one more ring before Aaron hangs'em up which is one more than I think we'll see for the rest of the time Ted Thompson is around.

EDIT: I'm going to guess the answer to the question...Is the Ted Thompson era considered successful to you regardless of what happens this year and next...is YES. Just because of one SB win, Ted Thompson has immunity from the majority of fans. Vince Lombardi would laugh at that. Winning one SB in all his years and never getting close to another would have to be considered a failure by Vince. Why the fans of the Green Bay Packers would ever be content with anything but "winning isn't everything, it's the only thing" is something I truly do not understand. Good is settled for way too easily. I don't want the Packers to be good for the next "x" years, I want them to win a SB and that will require more than just being good. The TEAM has to be great not just it's QB.
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."


Pack93z
10 years ago

Do we know what Eliot Wolf's philosophy is? It may not be anything like TT's or his father's.

I'll take the potential instability a non Wolf can bring us if it can bring us to one more ring before Aaron hangs'em up which is one more than I think we'll see for the rest of the time Ted Thompson is around.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



And you are basing this on what exactly? Have we made the playoffs the last 5 years winning it once in that span. That winning season was exception when looking at how many injuries that team overcame. The last couple season, one can argue we have been just as injury plagued.

Do I know Eliot's philosophy? No.. but I know this that he had been part of Thompson's staff and has continued to rise through it. I would hedge my money towards him following along with the likes of Schneider and Dorsey.. and if that is the case, you see much of the same philosophy as the elder Wolf and Thompson at play. Look at the growth of those teams under current leadership.. I am cool with anything similar.


EDIT: I'm going to guess the answer to the question...Is the Ted Thompson era considered successful to you regardless of what happens this year and next...is YES. Just because of one SB win, Ted Thompson has immunity from the majority of fans. Vince Lombardi would laugh at that. Winning one SB in all his years and never getting close to another would have to be considered a failure by Vince. Why the fans of the Green Bay Packers would ever be content with anything but "winning isn't everything, it's the only thing" is something I truly do not understand. Good is settled for way too easily. I don't want the Packers to be good for the next "x" years, I want them to win a SB and that will require more than just being good. The TEAM has to be great not just it's QB.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I don't give him immunity whatsoever, but I think year in and out he assembles one of the deepest rosters in the NFL, manages the cap very well and other than his lack of information.. very competent at his craft.

If anything, I would argue that Mike McCarthy and his reluctantly refusal to cut dead weight in his staff being more of a downfall of this team than or composition of roster year in and out. How long does one have to see Campen fail to build a solid NFL does it take.. now he has gotten directly involved last season. This year.. it is the defense.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (9h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (9h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (9h) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (13h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (13h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (13h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (15h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (15h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (15h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (15h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (16h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (16h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (16h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (16h) : 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 (17h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (17h) : 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 (17h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (17h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (17h) : 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 (18h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (18h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (18h) : 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 (18h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (19h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (19h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (19h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (19h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (21h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (21h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (22h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (22h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (22h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (22h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (22h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (22h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (22h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (22h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (22h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (22h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (22h) : 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 (22h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (22h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (22h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (22h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (22h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (22h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
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
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
31m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

21h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.