Ron Wolf: Legend. Ted Thompson: Failure.· Page 10

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

They could make a book/movie, Uffda Udfa + Jumal Rolle an unlikely love story for the ages.

Originally Posted by: steveishere

As long as Ted Thompson isn't the director, it has a chance to great.

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."

DarkaneRules
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#92

Ted is easily one of top 5 GMs in the league.

Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#93

Ted is easily one of top 5 GMs in the league.

Originally Posted by: DarkaneRules

Based on what? Our record? Mike Sherman must've been a Top 5 GM, too, if we're basing it off record. Why was Mike Sherman's record so good? Brett Favre. Do you happen to see any parallels with Ted Thompson? They're as plain as the nose on your face.

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."

68md
Member

9 years ago

#94

Had to reread this thread twice... and still feel like I did leaving some HS parties years and years ago. Dazed and confused.

Uffda doesn't dig Ted Thompson got it. Others think he's the man with the plan great got that.

My spin here, Ted Thompson is far from a perfect GM but he's a heck of a lot better then most. Has he missed some picks ? YUP Has he made a boneheaded move or 3. YUP

However he has the franchise in a rather stable place competing for NFC North Titles and beyond every year. That's hard not to appreciate.

Last note please for the love of god don't use Goodson to defend TT. I saw that kid trip over his own feet in TC last summer... TWICE !:xcensored

DoddPower
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#95

Fantasy land is what I fight against, daily, on this board.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Oh your cause is incredibly noble! I hope it brings you much joy, noble sir! We would be lost without you here to constantly tells us how wrong we are and how right you are. You are really changing the world with your repetitive forum posts!

I think you've really changed a lot of minds here. You've certainly made me change my mind on everything. (I don't see sarcasm emoticon anymore or it would be used heavily here). Keep fighting the good fight!

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

9 years ago

#96

I have addressed the issue...there was MAJOR risk in trading your 1st for a guy who totally flamed out in Atlanta...far more risk than using your own 1st rounder on him the previous year.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

It was a risk, not a major risk. Ron Wolf had two first round picks (5th overall and 19th overall) and was going after a quarterback he felt had all the tools to be a great quarterback and he also landed a quarterback guru for a head coach. When you look at the whole picture, it really wasn't as risky as some exaggerate it to be.

Something I found interesting. The Packers traded two 1993 second round picks, their 1993 fourth round pick, 1993 eighth round pick to the Dallas Cowboys for the 29 pick of the first round pick and a 1993 fourth round pick. George Teague was selected.

As for this topic, and after reviewing each of Wolf draft classes, he would take DT Jordan Phillips

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#97

Originally Posted by: DoddPower

I do hear Triumph in my head when I'm posting regarding TT.

I can only be repetitive about Ted Thompson if there is first another glorification post about him. Sadly, you just see my responses as annoying and repetitive while being blissfully unaware of another tireless "TT is great" post. It's like it needs to be typed about all the time to convince you of something you don't really believe.

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."

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#98

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Trading a 1st for a player who had proven to be a total clown is beyond a major risk...that is why it NEVER happens anymore for a player like Brett was in Atlanta. Tell me the last time you saw a GM deal a 1 for a guy like Favre after what he (didn't) show in Atlanta? That is the definition of a major risk.

Will anyone deal their 1 for Manziel? He showed nothing and was a clown in Cleveland. So, if a GM deals a 1 for him it wouldn't a major risk to you? See, this time you don't have hindsight on your side because you have no clue what would happen with Manziel if he was to be dealt for a 1st. Looking at it from this side increased the risk factor...I'm not sure risk is understood in the context we're discussing it. It seems the way it worked out has made some reinvent what the word risk actually means.

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."

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#99

Originally Posted by: wideside

Mike Sherman did the same as GM. He was a clown. Shermy had the Favre luxury like Ted Thompson has the Rodgers luxury, but at least Rodgers was TT's own "genius" pick.

Competing for the NFCN with the best QB to ever play is a given. Who our GM was would have zero bearing on whether we'd be in the hunt for NFCN titles. Sherman could GM us to that with Rodgers. A great GM has us with multiple rings already. That is why Ted Thompson is not a great GM. He's been there ONCE. The same thing that will be said when he's gone.

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

9 years ago

#100

Competing for the NFCN with the best QB to ever play is a given.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

I still think you give Aaron Rodgers FAR too much credit, and the rest of the Packers, including Ted Thompson, too little credit. Aaron Rodgers is NOT the "best quarterback to ever play." Perhaps he will end up that way, but he's not that yet. In order for him to be considered in the conversation for one of the best, he needs to play better in the playoffs for more than just one season and a couple other games. You can't absolve Rodgers for the Packers playoffs losses and place all the blame on Ted Thompson. A team could always be better. Absolutely. That's rhetorical. But Aaron Rodgers needs to play better in the playoffs. As do other superstars such as Clay Mathews, and many other players that are capable of playing better.

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 (14m) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (16m) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (27m) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (2h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (2h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (2h) : 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 (4h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (4h) : 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 (5h) : 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 (6h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (6h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (6h) : 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 (9h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (9h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (9h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (9h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (9h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (9h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (9h) : 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