Simple Question.... Why?· Page 8

warhawk
Senior Member

15 years ago

I think the Ted Thompson critics just refuse to look at the body of work that he faced and ultimately reject the way it was handled without considering the cards he was dealt.

By the time he got here MANY NFL insiders were seeing a weakened squad and were no longer giving the North Division to the Packers.

With no infusion of quality defensive players over several years that side of the ball was hurting badly. We had ONE CB (Harris) that could play, safety was a very weak position (thankfully Collins played respectfully well for a rookie), Barnett was the only real quality LB and the interior of the DL was not good resulting in one of the worst run defenses in the league.

Longwell wanted a roof and Favre was talking about quitting and the offense was aging fast. Ted Thompson had no choice but to consider who was next for guys like Green, Hondo, Flanny, Bubba, Favre and others. Ted Thompson inherited all of something like $2.1 mill in Cap dollars and within a couple of years SEVERAL key players like Barnett, Driver, Harris, etc. were going to have to be dealt with or lost.

So Ted's plan is to get the Cap right and utilize the draft to inject youth and quality on the roster and keep the core players on the team so he wouldn't end up chasing his tail by having to replace quality players with FA's. Being in position to deal with a Greg Jennings contract is a perfect example.

So what does he get for it from his critics? His butt kicked for "trading down" for more picks in the draft and not obtaining more high priced FA's. In other words that want it ALL.

"The train is leaving the station."

Pack93z
Select Member Topic Starter

15 years ago

#72

PackZ93= Pile of dung :icon_smile:

"Trippster" wrote:

That final week or two in LA, I would have preferred to be dung. :lol:

Warhawk.. Thompson was assisted greatly by record increases in the cap in 06 and 07... sometimes we tend to give him too much credit in that regard.. look around the league.. more so than not, teams have excess cap room to spare.

Not saying that he hasn't played the cap well, just making note that he got a huge assist in that department via the CBA.

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

beast
Select Member

15 years ago

#73

I think the Ted Thompson critics just refuse to look at the body of work that he faced and ultimately reject the way it was handled without considering the cards he was dealt.

By the time he got here MANY NFL insiders were seeing a weakened squad and were no longer giving the North Division to the Packers.

With no infusion of quality defensive players over several years that side of the ball was hurting badly. We had ONE CB (Harris) that could play, safety was a very weak position (thankfully Collins played respectfully well for a rookie), Barnett was the only real quality LB and the interior of the DL was not good resulting in one of the worst run defenses in the league.

Longwell wanted a roof and Favre was talking about quitting and the offense was aging fast. Ted Thompson had no choice but to consider who was next for guys like Green, Hondo, Flanny, Bubba, Favre and others. Ted Thompson inherited all of something like $2.1 mill in Cap dollars and within a couple of years SEVERAL key players like Barnett, Driver, Harris, etc. were going to have to be dealt with or lost.

So Ted's plan is to get the Cap right and utilize the draft to inject youth and quality on the roster and keep the core players on the team so he wouldn't end up chasing his tail by having to replace quality players with FA's. Being in position to deal with a Greg Jennings contract is a perfect example.

So what does he get for it from his critics? His butt kicked for "trading down" for more picks in the draft and not obtaining more high priced FA's. In other words that want it ALL.

"warhawk" wrote:

I thought the Packers were over the cap when Thompson came in. Wasn't that the reason or the claimed reason, Sharper and Wahle were cut?

Packerchick
Member

15 years ago

#74

Agreed, Dakota....nothing good will come of this thread.

That being said, some people just need something to gripe about....and he is a very visible and safe target for people's frustrations....football related or otherwise.

Kid talks back....Ted sucks.

Wife leave....Ted sucks.

Dog craps the carpet....Ted sucks.

"digsthepack" wrote:

the world is ending....ted sucks even then.

I am a woman and I love football.

MassPackersFan
Member

15 years ago

#75

I thought the Packers were over the cap when Thompson came in. Wasn't that the reason or the claimed reason, Sharper and Wahle were cut?

"beast" wrote:

I know I read recently (and not on a message board) that their projected number was over the salary cap, but I can't say for certain if it's true. Either way, it was damn close and they couldn't have signed their veterans.

warhawk
Senior Member

15 years ago

#76

I think the Ted Thompson critics just refuse to look at the body of work that he faced and ultimately reject the way it was handled without considering the cards he was dealt.

By the time he got here MANY NFL insiders were seeing a weakened squad and were no longer giving the North Division to the Packers.

With no infusion of quality defensive players over several years that side of the ball was hurting badly. We had ONE CB (Harris) that could play, safety was a very weak position (thankfully Collins played respectfully well for a rookie), Barnett was the only real quality LB and the interior of the DL was not good resulting in one of the worst run defenses in the league.

Longwell wanted a roof and Favre was talking about quitting and the offense was aging fast. Ted Thompson had no choice but to consider who was next for guys like Green, Hondo, Flanny, Bubba, Favre and others. Ted Thompson inherited all of something like $2.1 mill in Cap dollars and within a couple of years SEVERAL key players like Barnett, Driver, Harris, etc. were going to have to be dealt with or lost.

So Ted's plan is to get the Cap right and utilize the draft to inject youth and quality on the roster and keep the core players on the team so he wouldn't end up chasing his tail by having to replace quality players with FA's. Being in position to deal with a Greg Jennings contract is a perfect example.

So what does he get for it from his critics? His butt kicked for "trading down" for more picks in the draft and not obtaining more high priced FA's. In other words that want it ALL.

"beast" wrote:

I thought the Packers were over the cap when Thompson came in. Wasn't that the reason or the claimed reason, Sharper and Wahle were cut?

"warhawk" wrote:

I believe that we were slightly under but in todays NFL it was nothing to bargain with.

"The train is leaving the station."

warhawk
Senior Member

15 years ago

#77

PackZ93= Pile of dung :icon_smile:

"pack93z" wrote:

"Trippster" wrote:

Thankfully, he was aided by the increase which gave him the room to renegotiate several key players contracts. My point is had he went out and obtained other high-end FA's the money available to retain playeres would have been much less.

Don't forget the other end of the equation on the added cap dollars. It created record setting FA contracts which also had a trickle down affect in the renegotiation of ALL other players contracts as well.

You put more money in your pocket to buy more candy bars and the cost of candy bars goes up you still end up with the same amount of candy bars.

"The train is leaving the station."

ILikeThePackers39
Registered

15 years ago

#78

Cheesey, I am not doubting that Ted Thompson will do what he thinks is best for the team.

What I don't understand, is why so many people are ready to give him a pass if we have ANOTHER losing season. Winning is really all that matters.

"IronMan" wrote:

I don't know that I'd give him a pass. I would, however, take into account the circumstances surrounding that year, as I've done with the previous years.

His first year, he gets a pass - actually he gets a good grade because of the good work he did to clear some cap room and make room for the youth movement.

Second year, we improved. Especially towards the end. That's another passing grade, as it indicated that the changes he made were working.

Third year, we got one OT away from the Super Bowl. If he gets no credit for this, I fail to see how he can get blame for a bad year.

Fourth year, this is the one season I'm giving him bad marks for. In fact I'm giving him a solid FAIL, because he (and McCarthy) did nothing to address a flawed defensive scheme, and they botched the Favre situation horribly (yes, Favre deserves his own share of the blame, but we're not talking about him). So 2008 was a very bad year for Ted Thompson.

Next year, I'll look at the season and assess it the same way I have the other seasons. I'm not happy with 1 winning season out of 5 (if, in fact, they have a losing season next year), no - but I'm not into change for its own sake. If the team tanks again next year and they look to make a change, it better be for a proven guy and not just a scapegoat hunt.

blank

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

15 years ago

#79

I haven't seen one person give Ted Thompson a pass. I have seen people show they have faith in his abilities as a GM though. Probably because they are, ya know, Packers fans and are hoping for the best.

doddpower
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#80

PackZ93= Pile of dung :icon_smile:

"pack93z" wrote:

"Trippster" wrote:

While the increase in cap certainly helped, every other team in the NFL got that added room as well, and many teams are way worse off then the Packers.

So in that regard, that comes out in the wash. Ted does a good job managing the cap and having plenty of room to sign our key players, ie Greg Jennings. Only speaking of this one facet, I say good job Ted.

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 (1h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (3h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (13h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (13h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (13h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (13h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (13h) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (17h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (17h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (17h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (20h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (20h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (20h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (20h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (20h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (20h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (20h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (20h) : 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 (21h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (21h) : 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 (21h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (22h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (22h) : 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 (22h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (22h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (22h) : 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 (23h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

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

Zero2Cool (23h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23h) : 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

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

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