TT makes up for misses with hits· Page 4

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

15 years ago

Those who want to blast McCarthy I think are a little off right now. I say this because, what was wrong with our defense? It was vanilla and didn't give us the chance to get the ball back. Well, not the faith to do so even though we were in the top 3 in INT's last year. The defense was also a sieve when it mattered most.

Being an offensive coordinator for a team with a defense that can't stop anyone. I'd probably play conservatively as well and try to get 3 points on a 'safe' play instead of taking a risk of getting 7 points or nothing.

Weak defense when it matters most, a first year starting QB under a lot of scrutiny. I also think McCarthy played it safe trying to make Rodgers look better by not making him do 'a lot'.

Long story short, I think now that we have an alleged aggressive defense, QB with a year of starting under his belt, I'm willing to bet that McCarthy is willing to be more aggressive on his play calling.

beast
Select Member

15 years ago

#32

Gee if Mike Sherman failed, then Ted Thompson should not even be the GM.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

:magnifyglass: that makes no sense.... so since Sherman failed, Thompson shouldn't be a GM? That's pretty stupid since Thompson is doing well... unlike Sherman... who failed as GM.

but don't say he failed when his winning percntage was 2nd or 3rd best in Packer history.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

Seriously you got to stop trying to control people.... you just don't understand the job of a GM do you? It's about improving the talent on the team..... not wins..... Sherman was a good coach but horrible GM who failed at GM because he didn't add as much talent as he lost.

The Packer organization failed when they gave MS the double duty of GM/HC.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

I agree.... but that doesn't give Sherman a free pass.... he failed as a GM because he sucked at keeping up the talent level up....

Wow, this Sherman bullshit again? Has it NOT been documented ENOUGH that Sherman inherited a deep roster built by Ron Wolf and rode those coat tails? Yes, it has. Sherman is so FIVE years ago.

Sherman didn't do a damn thing but ride Wolf's talent. He was a good offensive coach, that's it. This whole mention of Sherman makes me want to go and AGAIN prove all of this, but what's the point? Just like some morons hate for no reason, they will do the same with Ted and/or Sherman.

Ted is a better GM than Sherman, period.

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

I guess it hasn't because some people Sherman was a decent GM.... when really he was horrible. He killed the talent level and put the team over the cap.

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#33

#1 Don't ever call me stupid.

#2, Z I agree the MS thing is old and over with, but every time someone tries to crown Ted Thompson as king of all GM's, they have to take a shot at Mike Sherman, when all the guy did was win when he was at Green Bay, and took on a double role when asked to.

Hell The Packer brass should have just gave Mike Holmgren the control he wanted and this would all be mute.

#3 Like it or not(right or wrong), Gm's, Hc's, players and teams are in the end judged by their W/L record.

#4 Most Every GM or HC fails sooner or later, that is why they get fired. That doesn't mean they sucked, it means someone higher up in the organization thinks it's time for a change.

Right now ,at this point in time,comparing the two, MS has a better record, that is what I meant when I said Ted Thompson shouldn't be GM. Have I cleared it up now?
Ted Thompson has built a great team, all kinds of potential, now is the time they have to prove it on the field, not on paper.

When they do that, then I will be there along with everyone else giving TT,MM and the whole team all the acaldes they deserve.

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

TwinkieGorilla
Member

15 years ago

#34

#1 Don't ever call me stupid.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

why not, stupid?

I agree with Twinkiegorilla.

bozz_2006 wrote:

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

15 years ago

#35

#1 Don't ever call me stupid.

#2, Z I agree the MS thing is old and over with, but every time someone tries to crown Ted Thompson as king of all GM's, they have to take a shot at Mike Sherman, when all the guy did was win when he was at Green Bay, and took on a double role when asked to.

Hell The Packer brass should have just gave Mike Holmgren the control he wanted and this would all be mute.

#3 Like it or not(right or wrong), Gm's, Hc's, players and teams are in the end judged by their W/L record.

#4 Most Every GM or HC fails sooner or later, that is why they get fired. That doesn't mean they sucked, it means someone higher up in the organization thinks it's time for a change.

Right now ,at this point in time,comparing the two, MS has a better record, that is what I meant when I said Ted Thompson shouldn't be GM. Have I cleared it up now?

Ted Thompson has built a great team, all kinds of potential, now is the time they have to prove it on the field, not on paper.

When they do that, then I will be there along with everyone else giving Ted Thompson,Mike McCarthy and the whole team all the acaldes they deserve.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

1, I didn't call you stupid.
2, Huh?
3, No kidding! Wolf RETIRED. That implies he did a fair to good job at said position when it was handed over to the next GM, Sherman. Sherman was FIRED, that means he drove the car into a freaking wall and it needed ot be fixed. SO, yeah NO SHIT Thompson's record is going to be worse than Shermans. Sherman inherited a good team. Thompson inherited a MESS. What the truck is so complicated about understanding this simple concept?
4, Seriously, READ what I've said. And I'll repeat some of it again, this is the year it's time to put up or feel the heat. No more sugar coat excuses. And no, I don't give the staff a pass because we switched to a 3 - 4. If the coach didn't feel the current defense was good enough, he should have made the change sooner. So that's on his ass and does not count as a free pass.

Sherman should NOT be the GM, period. And IF you are thinking he should, then yes, I am calling you S T U P I D! 🙂 (heres hoping you dont think he should be GM lol)

Rockmolder
Honored Member

15 years ago

#36

Just a little point. I don't know if it would've panned out if we had given GM rights to Holmgren. He got that in Seattle and failed there. There where actually quite a few calls for his head from the fanbase to not only take his GM powers away, but also fire him as the HC of the team.

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#37

Z, I wasn't responding to your post, except for the part of agreeing with you about the MS thing being old. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Rockmolder, I tried to make the point of GM/HC not working earlier, it probably would have been Holmgren getting fired instead of Sherman had they let MH be GM/HC.

The point being it was a failed experiment, it just doesn't work, you can't sit in an office and negotiate with players and agents, then go out and try and coach those same players.

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

dfosterf
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#38

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

I agree with this. Combo GM and HC works rarely.

+1

I understood what you were trying to say...

Beast didn't call you stupid, btw. , imo...he was making a point about something said--not "a state of being"--- again, imo.

Twinkie--well, Twinkie is kinda "touched" if you know what I mean, lol

Zero- as noted, because you mentioned him he got a little mixed up on who is saying what to who...

or something... I am kinda stupid sometimes, so get easily confused :thumbleft: (Giving Vikesrule a little sig material)

ILikeThePackers39
Registered

15 years ago

#39

Actually, I need to get Buckeye's back on this to some extent. This place has a strange inability to simply praise someone who they think is doing well - there always seems to be an associated insult to someone else.

I can buy that Sherman wasn't being asked to insert youth onto his roster - I think his pressure was to continually re-tool the team and ride Favre's prime years for all they were worth. I don't think he was great at it, but the records do indicate that he wasn't bad. He kept a high-performing squad together. Problem for him was that his high-performing squad aged quickly, and he wasn't up to the task of rebuilding.

So yeah, I agree with Buckeye. The same people who get cranky when someone takes a shot at one of Thompson's mis-steps (and he's made a few) have no problem doing the same thing to Sherman. It's a little silly, really. I'd say Shermy did a pretty decent job, given what I'd assume his objectives were, and I have yet to see a GM/Coach combo that really works. It was a bad idea, period. Meanwhile, Thompson has done a decent job considering what his objectives look to be.

Check it out - no collateral damage. :thumbleft:

blank

beast
Select Member

15 years ago

#40

#1 Don't ever call me stupid.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

Ummm I don't think anyone called you stupid.... and you have no problem telling people when and where they can say things...

Beast didn't call you stupid, btw. , imo...he was making a point about something said--not "a state of being"--- again, imo.

"dfosterf" wrote:

Thanks for noticing what was really happened.

#2, Z I agree the MS thing is old and over with, but every time someone tries to crown Ted Thompson as king of all GM's, they have to take a shot at Mike Sherman, when all the guy did was win when he was at Green Bay, and took on a double role when asked to.

Hell The Packer brass should have just gave Mike Holmgren the control he wanted and this would all be mute.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

For the record I'm not trying to crown Thompson as anything but Packers GM and much much better than Sherman... but that not because Thompson is the king of all GMs. It more because Sherman was horrible at restocking talent..... while Thompson has good at stocking talent.

And win isn't the only thing he did... he also wasted a lot of draft picks and money, while not getting new talent.

#3 Like it or not(right or wrong), Gm's, Hc's, players and teams are in the end judged by their W/L record.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

That's not all they're judge by... they are also judged if they've done there job or not... and Sherman clearly didn't do a good job as GM because as GM he was suppose to get talent not waste draft picks and sending the Packers over the cap limit.

#4 Most Every GM or HC fails sooner or later, that is why they get fired. That doesn't mean they sucked, it means someone higher up in the organization thinks it's time for a change

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

Well it was time for change because he put the Packers over the cap limit (aka failed) and the depth was horrible (aka failed). It's simple Sherman did a horrible job as GM of keeping the money in check and keeping talent on the roster other than the top which was from Wolf.

When they do that, then I will be there along with everyone else giving Ted Thompson,Mike McCarthy and the whole team all the acaldes they deserve.

"buckeyepackfan" wrote:

Well Thompson got voted GM of the year... but other than that what acaldes? I don't know of any... I do know Sherman did a horrible job as GM.... with going over the cap.... not keeping good depth....

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 (2h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (2h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (2h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (4h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (4h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

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

Zero2Cool (5h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (5h) : yes due to tie breaker

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

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

bboystyle (5h) : 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 (6h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (6h) : 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 (6h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (6h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (6h) : 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 (7h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (7h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (7h) : 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 (7h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (8h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (8h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (8h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (8h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (8h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (8h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (10h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (10h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (11h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (11h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (11h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (11h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (11h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (11h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (11h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (11h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (11h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (11h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (11h) : 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 (11h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (11h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (11h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (11h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (11h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (11h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (11h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (11h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (11h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (11h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (12h) : 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