I know this is inappropriate to post right before a game, but I think it is a very interesting topic that could bring about some great discussion. Basically, I wanted to compare GB's recent more conservative team building strategy with that of a more aggressive front office, like the New York Jets.

I will be comparing the Jets strategy with the Packers since 2005 when two new GMs Ted Thompson and Mike Tannenbaum hired two first year coaches to turn around their teams that each went 4--12: Mike McCarthy and Eric Mangini. Both teams have had there ups and downs since then, but let me compare some key moments that show the drastically different approaches taken by these two teams.

Well, Mike McCarthy and Eric Mangini became coaches in the same year. Rex Ryan is now in his first year. Mangini was been 23-25 with the Jets (2 winning seasons, 1 losing season). Ryan has been 3-2 so a total of 25-27, right below .500. In the same 3 year time span McCarthy has been 27-21, but with only one winning season. So I think it is safe to say, that there really hasn't been tht big of a difference in results.

We all know the Packers way of doing things: ie: developing young talent, resigning core guys, relying on the draft, refusing to overspend on veteran free agents etc...

The Jets are a little bit more aggressive. The frequently trade picks for players, sign notable free agents, trade sucessful players that don't fit their scheme, trade up in the draft etc. Some of these have paid off, some not so much. I'd like you guys to debate which strategy you think has worked the best.

Trading Picks for Players
2006
RB Thomas Jones and low 2nd round pick for a high 2nd round pick.
QB Pat Ramsey for 6th round pick

2008
- 3rd and a 5th for Kris Jenkins, a stud 4-3 DT with baggage and drama that they were hoping could make a smooth transition to NT. He did.
- We all know they traded a 4th rounder for Favre right before the season started. The jury may be out on that one, but I think it was the right move for them and was a great value.

2009
CB Lito Shephard for a 5th
WR Braylon Edwards for a 3rd and a 5th and some back ups

Trading successful players that don't fit your scheme
2006 - Trade John Abraham for 1st round pick
2007 - Trade Pete Kendell for 4th round pick
2008 - Trade Vilma for 3rd and 4th

Signing Veteran or High Risk Free Agents
2008 - Signed 3 stud free agents to big deals. All 3 start, and play well.
OG Alan Faneca
RT Damien Woody - former pro bowler who was struggling in Detroit
3-4 OLB Calvin Pace - their best pass rusher
CB Ty Law - provided stop gap for a year or two while young guys develop
TE Bubba Franks - bust
FB Tony Richardson

2009 - Signed two key 3-4 guys
ILB Bart Scott
SS Jim Leonhard

Reaching or Trading Up in Draft
2007
Darelle Revis (trade up)
David Harris (traded up with GB)

2008
Vernon Gholston 3-4 OLB (reach)
Dustin Keller TE (traded up with GB)

2009
Mark Sanchez QB (trade up)
Shonn Greene (trade up)


So looking at their depth chart, I'd say 9/11 starters on offense and 7/11 on defense were acquired by these more risky transactions.

I know this has turned into a long thread, but hopefully it will start some good discussion.

I don't think either is the right or wrong way to go. Ted's way, is a slower fix, but IMO in the long run puts a more consistent product on the field. And keeps them around.

NYJ way forces them to continue to trade and sign FA. Or go into a rebuild. Look at this last off season. the Jets were over the new cap before FA or the draft ever came about. They have to move players around to keep under the cap.

For coaching I would prefer to be in the Packers way. It gives the coach the ability to build a team. Last year, the Jets sold out on that year really with the signings. If they didn't make the playoffs with the talent that was brought in it was a failure. When working like that there is no room for failure, because of the cuts that will have to be made after the season is over.

What I am waiting to see come to light is the consistency of Ted's way. I believe it allows for less turnover. Get the team close and use FA to finish the team. That way the cost is less, allowing for lesser adjustments the following year. Which IMO will keep the team at the top longer because once it is going right, it doesn't take as long to recover from taking that shot.

Now Ted just needs to get us to that point.

---