Ted Thompson to Open His Checkbook?· Page 2

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

The irony is strong with this one!

As for free agency, something else to remember that sometimes players use their RIGHT and choose to go elsewhere. GASP!!! I know, right!!!! How dare they!!!

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Examples? Cite them! Get out from behind the curtain. Rent the veil. Let's see what the real narrative should be about this football team by really getting it all out there. Sadly, those promoting the Packers version, are going to scatter rather than stand.

Almost fell over when I clicked the link that was within the tweet you wanted everyone to see... delicious irony that THIS was what was behind the veil:

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."

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

7 years ago

#12

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

You want free agents that the Packers went after and didn't get, however, you provide list of players they should sign? I have.

That's right, scatter little scattering rat, SCATTER!!!

I actually know more failed trade attempts than free agency attempts off the top of my head, lol.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

#13

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

No. I want examples of inconsistent logic from me.

The chatter is louder than usual that we might actually do something in FA. Now, make sure when we do that you call it wrong and impractical just like Mike McCarthy said in his presser. 🙂 I will be walking on sunshine to see that day. Get rid of Dom, I'll dance. Get rid of Ted I'll party like it's 1999. Fire MM, I'll consider streaking.

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."

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

7 years ago

#14

No. I want examples of inconsistent logic from me.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

see below
http://www.packershome.com/forum/search?postedby=uffda%20udfa

The chatter is louder than usual that we might actually do something in FA. Now, make sure when we do that you call it wrong and impractical just like Mike McCarthy said in his presser. 🙂

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

When we sign a free agent, I am supposed to call it wrong and impractical?

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

#15

see below
http://www.packershome.com/forum/search?postedby=uffda%20udfa

When we sign a free agent, I am supposed to call it wrong and impractical?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

First, hilarious... ANYTHING I've posted is inconsistent because I'm not part of the hive mind. Got it. Ha ha.

Yes, if you tote the Packers line you should be critical of us signing a FA. Mike McCarthy said it wasn't practical. We don't need to get over the hump by using FA. That is not practical per him, so, YES, if we sign someone I want the hive to criticize it because it's just not practical.

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."

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

7 years ago

#16

Why is this debate even going on right now?

The list of free agents is probably in the hundreds right now.
Can we wait until teams sign the guys they want to keep before we start railing on Ted to sign someone.

Also it really doesn't matter, I'd Ted decides to stay out of Free agency, then the weekly calls for him to be fired will continue.
Ted decides to sign a free agent, it will immediately be deemed the wrong move by all the genius internet GM's and the weekly calls for him to be fired will continue.

Sitting back and enjoying the off season reading.

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

PackFanWithTwins
Veteran Member

7 years ago

#17

It is so easy to sit back and say. Go sign this FA or that FA, when you don't actually have to go and do it while keeping the team in good position financially with the Salary Cap. Seems nobody ever considers what the waterfall effect of signing some of these "prime" FA for the money they end up getting. That impact is normally not being able to sign somebody else down the road. If we had signed FA people wanted in 2015, one result would have been not being able to do Daniels Contract when we did, him making it to the FA market and either losing him or having to pay more than we did.

One free agent could be the difference between getting to the SB and not, it can also set the team back farther.

The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

7 years ago

#18

Yes, if you tote the Packers line you should be critical of us signing a FA.Mike McCarthy said it wasn't practical.We don't need to get over the hump by using FA.That is not practical per him, so, YES, if we sign someone I want the hive to criticize it because it's just not practical.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Oh, so you are being inconsiderate and disrespectful towards me by putting a "line" of thinking as if it were mine? That's awfully kind of you. And I kindly ask you to shove it up your ass.

I've maintained the line that a successful team NEEDS to avoid the huge name opening day free agent signings and to target the second and third tier free agents. I've also said that even if you have a Grade C player, I would be good with paying them Grade B money to land them.

I do not believe free agency is a "water filled with sharks". I believe free agency is a tool that if used appropriately (e.g. Patriots, Seahawks) can help your team.

Our current approach appears to be to trade your 3rd round pick for someones 4th, 6th and 7th round picks. I don't necessarily agree with that approach.

Given our failures at 1st round picks. I have also stated NUMEROUS times I would rather us trade our 1st rounder for an additional 2nd 3rd and 4th rounder or something of similar compensation.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

#19

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

No disrespect or lack of consideration intended or done. We were discussing inconsistent logic. I was pointing out the fact that the Packers hive mentality would have to be confused if Ted signed someone. We just had Mike McCarthy say it wasn't practical to be using FA to get over the hump. Just a call to pick a side. Not only your own personal views on FA but to call out what Mike McCarthy said if you didn't agree with what he had to say. My consistency shouldn't be an issue. I've had very strong opinions on this regime for years. I only smile now seeing how the tide is turning and people are finally seeing what I saw a long long time ago.

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."

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

7 years ago

#20

No disrespect or lack of consideration intended or done.We were discussing inconsistent logic.I was pointing out the fact that the Packers hive mentality would have to be confused if Ted signed someone.We just had Mike McCarthy say it wasn't practical to be using FA to get over the hump.Just a call to pick a side. Not only your own personal views on FA but to call out what Mike McCarthy said if you didn't agree with what he had to say.My consistency shouldn't be an issue.I've had very strong opinions on this regime for years. I only smile now seeing how the tide is turning and people are finally seeing what I saw a long long time ago.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Some people pick a side and stubbornly and naively stick to it. I see trends and changes and acquire information that sometimes alters my perception. Such as when Ted Thompson took over the Packers, I was good with the trade high picks for more picks approach so we could build a solid roster. I believe we have a pretty decent core at this stage I feel the Packers need to be more surgical with draft picks and should use free agency when appropriate.

It's been said a side must be picked, or rather a call for someone to pick a side. There are no sides and that kind of divisive thinking is horrible.

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

Zero2Cool (6h) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.

packerfanoutwest (6h) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it

beast (7h) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done

Zero2Cool (14h) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.

Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore

packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!

Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!

beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

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

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

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 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.

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