Which tightend available last offseason, via free agency or the draft, would have given the Packers the weapon you guys are looking for? Would you have thrown all that money at Clay or Cameron? Both completely underwhelmed this past season.

Not bashing anyone's opinion. Just curious who you guys have in mind.

Originally Posted by: Bigbyfan 

When Dakota speaks on Rodgers like this, here is what I see:

Ted Thompson sitting in a comfy chair in the grotto wearing his safari hat and sunglasses, a smoking jacket over his silk pajamas, puffing on a pipe, drinking a Dos Equis and two slightly plumb pasty white Wisconsin chicks clad in cheese foam bras and panties sitting on each arm of his chair each with one arm on his shoulder.

He snaps his fingers and says, “Chives, go get me Gronkowski!”

He then turns to Dakota and says, "I don’t find TEs very often, but when I do I find me some Gronkowskis."

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 

Which tightend available last offseason, via free agency or the draft, would have given the Packers the weapon you guys are looking for? Would you have thrown all that money at Clay or Cameron? Both completely underwhelmed this past season.

Not bashing anyone's opinion. Just curious who you guys have in mind.

Originally Posted by: Bigbyfan 

They will just look at the 2015 stats and then answer you, because that's what folks do with their brilliant wisdom aka hindsight.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

It works both ways. We can look at a lower tier signee who made a big impact an say "We should have signed him" or we can look at a big name signee who flopped and say "You would have had us sign him?" Either way we look at stats to prove our point and we will ignore those players whose results don't fit our philosophy.

Originally Posted by: sschind 

As much as I disagree with Dakota and Ufda much of the time I will say this. I'm not sure its fair to put them on the spot with these types of questions. Who would you have signed? How much should we have paid them? Who would you have let go? etc. They are not the GMs and they do not know any more about any given player or situation than we do (I mean that in a good way guys, honest) Their position is that we are weak at certain positions and that Ted Thompson has not taken appropriate steps to improve those positions. To them, almost anyone would be an improvement and by sticking with the guys we have Ted Thompson is not doing all he can.

Originally Posted by: sschind 

It is not their responsibility to identify those players who would improve the position. That is the responsibility of the GM and in their mind the GM is failing. I do not necessarily agree with their assessment but but I do understand it. They do not have access to all the tools an NFL GM has so to expect them to have some sort of ESP to know which players may have helped is not fair. That works against them in some ways however in that Ted does have access to all those tools and in his opinion there was no one worth the risk. Whose opinion is more valid?

Originally Posted by: sschind 

As much as I disagree with Dakota and Ufda much of the time I will say this. I'm not sure its fair to put them on the spot with these types of questions. Who would you have signed? How much should we have paid them? Who would you have let go? etc. They are not the GMs and they do not know any more about any given player or situation than we do (I mean that in a good way guys, honest)

Originally Posted by: sschind 

I'm going to simply assume at this point that people simply enjoy complaining about Ted Thompson/in general and find expressing their opinion with even a tiny amount of detail regarding what they would do differently is just completely irrational of me. Holy shit, do I need to get on my knees and beg people to tell me who you would have picked, what would we have signed him for/given up for him, and what impact do you think he would have on the team?

Bigby, want to beg with me? Tough crowd, I've never seen anybody so reluctant to express their opinion.

Originally Posted by: Porforis