Do you want Ted Thompson to be extended?· Page 12

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

Presenting a fact is propping it up as an excuse.. check. And I am the one trying to paint another.. gotcha.

What is interesting is the better run franchises seemingly are able to overcome the injuries.. whereas even when healthy the poorly ran clubs continue to struggle. I think that speaks to the importance of depth on a club.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z

No, what is even simpler is looking at those franchises and seeing they have big time QB's who cover a multitude of sins.

I have to go to the Bucs at 9 before I find a team on there who isn't covered up by it's QB. I'd take Tampa as a TEAM and leave Aaron as the QB. The Packers team isn't very good. 2-5-1 without our cover up QB. Bad ST's year after year to go with bad defense. Yes, a juggernaut around our HOF QB.

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."

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

10 years ago

#112

I have to go to the Bucs at 9 before I find a team on there who isn't covered up by it's QB. I'd take Tampa as a TEAM and leave Aaron as the QB. The Packers team isn't very good. 2-5-1 without our cover up QB. Bad ST's year after year to go with bad defense. Yes, a juggernaut around our HOF QB.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

You got the numbers for when Clay and Randall and Jermichael were suited up as well or you gonna omit those major starters?

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#113

You got the numbers for when Clay and Randall and Jermichael were suited up as well or you gonna omit those major starters?

Originally Posted by: Kevin

That is an unknown. What we do know is when all of those guys were healthy and on board and we spent an entire offseason gunning to get revenge on the Niners we still couldn't get it done...even with Aaron. I can't imagine how far the gap between us and them with Aaron, but minus Cobb, Finley and Matthews.

I know...we were so close vs. SF in the playoffs. No Finley and no Matthews. Everyone knows that the cold is a major issue for teams from warm climates like SF. It was our great equalizer. Had that game been played in SF I believe we would've been destroyed by the Niners.

Illusions. We got our one SB. We were as injured then as we were over the last 3 years. What is different?

Our D is terrible and it wasn't during our SB run... Rodgers has not played absolutely lights out like it takes for us to win with so little of a team around him.

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
Select Member

10 years ago

#114

Of course the argument is going to shift... we weren't looking at games lost to injury charts... good debates are varied and cover a lot of ground not just a single track.

Seattle does NOT have a similar approach to us... Do you say that because one of our former guys is out there? Ted Thompson is not trading 1st overalls for ascending YOUNG talent. He's NEVER done it in Green Bay...not once...not even close to doing it. Seattle adds key pieces via FA. We don't. I would say that Pickett and Woodson were big contributors during our SB run. Where are the guys like them now? Guion and Peppers are Pickett and Woodson? I don't know. A middling DL and a nearly finished DE who is switching positions doesn't inspire a ton of confidence.

You have acknowledged and admitted my exact point. Denver acts according to the idea that Peyton's time is short. There is urgency....but before there was urgency they made the playoffs and beat a real playoff team (PIttsburgh) which is something Green Bay hasn't done since winning the SB. Was winning a playoff game in thrilling fashion, I might add, good enough for the Broncos? No, it wasn't...but it would be in Green Bay. I can't imagine the Tebow gear in Packerland had he been one of ours and beaten a team in the divisional round of the playoffs. Ted Thompson would've NEVER moved on from Tebow....good would've been just good enough for him and for you. You said it...you like the "always have a chance" mode of thinking. I don't.

Green Bay should operate as Denver does realizing it has a special talent at QB and he's not going to be around forever. Hoping to get one shot out of the remaining years with Aaron vs. what Denver is doing with Peyton is light years apart.

And for the last time, Seattle does NOT have Green Bay's approach. Russell Wilson wouldn't have started as a rookie in Green Bay... he would've had to develop nice and slow for a few years first. There would be no Harvin or Rice in Green bay. No Avril, no Michael Bennett. Chris Harper wouldn't have been cut as a 4th rounder like Seattle did to him had he been with Green Bay. Seattle and Green Bay are NOT the same...not even close. Another Packer Fan fallacy as if anyone ever worked for the Packers each and every one of them thinks exactly the same as TT. Not even close to the way it is.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Has Ted given up a 1st.. nope. But he did package a number of picks to obtain Matthews.. correct?

Ted doesn't cut bait when players don't perform? Brohm anyone.

I care less where John Schneider came from.. his blue print is similar to ours. Obtain a franchise QB. Check. He had to play because the options were non existent. You have no idea if Rodgers would have played sooner.. we had a potential HOF QB at the helm. But there is no mystery to why Ted and company didn't blink when Favre retired.

Funny you mention Bennett.. an UDFA that developed.. left and came back on a one year deal when his market didn't materialize like he hoped for when it was reported that his rotator cuff was torn. Sound like a Ted type move. Then after he performed well.. Seattle made some moves and retained him. Hmmmm.

No doubt that they have been a little more active in FA.. but it is not like they have been running out and signing everyone. Again.. I agree we should be more active in FA.. but it is not like we have completely ignored it in his tenure. We did net the 2009 defensive player of the year that helped propel us to a SB. We signed Saturday last season.. didn't work. But like Seattle.. we added pieces that augmented the roster. Lynch was added to a team much like Grady Jackson was to our midseason to help the clubs as examples.Ted didn't trade an established aging CB for basically Nick Collins.

But look at their roster.. younger roster.. draft heavy with developing talent. One of the biggest stars they have is a 5th round (*edit - needed to correct that he was a 5th) corner that has developed. There entire legion of Boom are draft picks. Similar.. not the same. To me.. the biggest difference currently is the talent they roll out on their defensive line and the scheme they have built around it. Much like the Giants run.. a stable of horses in an aggressive front to get after the QB. To me.. again that is tied back into coaching and scheme. Partial Ted's fault.. some not on him. Mike McCarthy wanted the 3-4 front..

Nah.. it is just because Schneider came from Green Bay. 🙄

For the record.. I am not a Packer homer.. not in the least. Just think differently than you..

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

Pack93z
Select Member

10 years ago

#115

You have acknowledged and admitted my exact point. Denver acts according to the idea that Peyton's time is short. There is urgency....but before there was urgency they made the playoffs and beat a real playoff team (PIttsburgh) which is something Green Bay hasn't done since winning the SB. Was winning a playoff game in thrilling fashion, I might add, good enough for the Broncos? No, it wasn't...but it would be in Green Bay. I can't imagine the Tebow gear in Packerland had he been one of ours and beaten a team in the divisional round of the playoffs. Ted Thompson would've NEVER moved on from Tebow....good would've been just good enough for him and for you. You said it...you like the "always have a chance" mode of thinking. I don't.

Green Bay should operate as Denver does realizing it has a special talent at QB and he's not going to be around forever. Hoping to get one shot out of the remaining years with Aaron vs. what Denver is doing with Peyton is light years apart.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

So.. what do you tell the team and Rodgers.. better get it done now.. because we are going to be in cap hell after the run.. when he is what 32? 33?

Bronco's don't have a choice.. they paid Peyton big dollars for a very short window. Let's revisit next season.. or at best the following when the cap hits or roster has aged overpaid players like Ware on it or they have cut them and dead money floating all around them. Starting over.

Not saying your approach is wrong.. just what if you load up and your QB goes down? Still think your odds are great at winning it all on that single loaded year?

Superbowl teams can be built in many ways.. see 2010.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#116

Originally Posted by: Pack93z

First, I would start with that I've never called you a homer. I have linked you to them with this idea that being good is good enough. That is one of the traits for sure. The pride in winning divisional titles in a division like ours which hasn't been all that tough given the competition smacks of settling for far less than the best.

Broncos do have a choice...Packers have same choice just choose differently because of the illusion of time. Rodgers career could end before Manning...nobody knows for sure. The illusion is that Aaron will go like he is for another 6-7 years. He could suffer a neck injury like the many Packers before him and be done this pre-season or TC. You never know so why live in the illusion you have all these years? You don't know if you do.

The idea that Seattle got a franchise QB as validation they're like us might be the weakest thing you've said this entire thread. EVERY team longs for a franchise QB. Ask Minnesota. BTW, you don't usually find your franchise QB in the 3rd round. Green Bay traded a first and used a first to get their Favre and Rodgers. Seattle is very dissimilar in that regard....their philosophy is not the same. It gets old hearing our philosophy trying to be validated by Seattle's.

Yes, SB teams can be built in many ways...I said that earlier in this thread. I acknowledge TT's draft of Rodgers in my OP but you asked me later in the thread who was responsible for bringing us Rodgers? I know who and the circumstances around it.

We shouldn't all think alike....it's good for the board. Some take it as an evil that my thoughts are so far from theirs. It does drive me crazy at times to see some of the things I see. I'm passionate about my view, and you may never see it like I do but you'll know exactly why I think what I think. I would like that from everyone who types here. Bring it hard.

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
Select Member

10 years ago

#117

We shouldn't all think alike....it's good for the board. Some take it as an evil that my thoughts are so far from theirs. It does drive me crazy at times to see some of the things I see. I'm passionate about my view, and you may never see it like I do but you'll know exactly why I think what I think. I would like that from everyone who types here. Bring it hard.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

So then why did you take offense and claim that I was trying to paint you as anything? I am equally passionate and point after point presented why I think the way I do. But I am methodical in life as well.. so it only makes sense. I will take the gamble that Rodgers career arc is similar to most.. one of the longest tenured positions on the team. Name the last QB that retired in his prime that was a franchise quality QB to injury? Culpepper? Was he really a franchise QB?

But not denying.. the game of football of risk.. anyone's career could be over in a single snap. Hell their life could.. why it bothers me little that they are well paid in general. Obsessive is a different story for a different topic.

As far as Wilson.. Schneider was trying every avenue to obtain a franchise QB.. FA, Scrap heap.. draft. He got one.. and hasn't looked back building the team around him. Flynn.. exiled. TJ.. there by default because it really isn't a comparative in talent, he is paid like a backup and seemingly has accepted his role.

My point was simply.. they are drafting and developing players at the core. Not trying to build through free agency like many try to do yearly because they draft poorly. Look at their success at drafting in totality. Similar trait.

In Summary.. Ted's performance on the job has been very solid and he was able to help guide us to a Superbowl.. lucky breaks included.. like any team that hoists the Superbowl doesn't get a bounce their way.. see the last meaningful play of the Seattle San Fran game. And teams get hot year after year.. Giants have done it a couple times.

As far as you being evil.. don't think I have framed you as such.. I just happen to think differently. And have gone great lengths to explain why.

1. Fill your QB spot successfully. Check. The game (not in my liking) is a passing league now... you have to have a QB that can perform. Having an elite QB.. bonus.
2. Build a solid core of the roster. For the most part check.
3. Do not overload on the top end of the roster and forgo depth. Check.. almost to the extreme end of it.
4. Use FA to fill development holes... Needs work.. but have had success at it.

Guide the team to the playoffs yearly in which you have a shot is what I value the most. We have seen year after year in this era of teams that get in and go on a run. Do I want to be a dominate team year after year.. yes.. but I personally just don't think the best probability to obtain that is to go all out for a one or two year window and forgo several others.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#118

Guide the team to the playoffs yearly in which you have a shot is what I value the most. We have seen year after year in this era of teams that get in and go on a run. Do I want to be a dominate team year after year.. yes.. but I personally just don't think the best probability to obtain that is to go all out for a one or two year window and forgo several others.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z

That is exactly what I've been railing against from the outset. No wonder we are at loggerheads. You possess a view that drives me insane. I can't or won't call it wrong...but it is very wrong TO ME.

When you turn off your TV after seeing another one and done I'm not sure what goes through your head except for a bunch of excuses that we're really not that far away because of injury or whatever? I just shake my head and think another wasted year of Aaron Rodgers. I think we would've drilled Carolina had we gotten past SF as I didn't respect Carolina and thought they were as overrated as they come.

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."

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

10 years ago

#119

That is an unknown.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

You can't go to each players profile page and compare the numbers, yet you throw down this 2-5-1 as your proof that the roster is weak? That seems fishy!!!!

StarrMax1
Registered

10 years ago

#120

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Jesus, how many times do you think you have to tell everyone THAT YOU WANT TED THOMPSON GONE????

Fine, guess what, for now he is staying, you have an opinion, guess what, NOT MANY AGREE WITH YOU.

There is only 1 fan base happy at the end of every year, last year it was the Seahawks.

For you the grass is always greener on the other side of the road.

You know what replacing your GM and/or coach every 2 or 3 years gets you?

THE FUCKING CLEVELAND BROWNS!!!!!!

Now that's a franchise I want to get behind.

Tell me now if you are going to continue this completely assinnine spamming of the forum, if you are then, Hey buddy IT'S ALL YOURS.

I've only been here a few months, was really liking what I saw and read until you decided you were going to be THE SAVIOR OF ALL PACKER FANS and tell us what we should be thinking.

Spam on brother, blocking your posts, please do the same with mine, and if you see me posting my opinion on a subject, know this now, I don't fucking care what you have to say about it, so please ignore.

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

beast (4h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (9h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (10h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (20h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (20h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (21h) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

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

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS