TT players and Sanders schemes, so where do we go from here?· Page 4

slaket
Registered

16 years ago

slaket, you still refuse to state the point that'd help you the most: the Pats had 14 players on IR, yet finished 11-5. They did it without their best playmaker (arguably) to boot.

Oh yeah, we're closer to a few million (around 3 if I'm not mistaken) since Aaron Rodgers contract counted for 20 million of cap space in the 08-09 season.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

I've stated the Pats argument all day in the chat room. People aren't really interested in hearing anything negative about TT. Which I guess I understand to a point, but I still think it should be heard.
Ted Thompson did a terrible job this year on the defense.

It is was it is

longtimefan
Registered

16 years ago

#32

How many out of of those 4 were able to be replaced with a decent quality player? This thread is about Ted Thompson. Why didn't he have any depth on defense?

"slaket" wrote:

Yup I agree it lays on Ted for not having depth as he had last year..

However it was only Williams that he didnt really replace...

Maybe he was led to believe by coaches and trainers that Harrell, and others were up to the task and there was no need to bring in anyone..

Has that ever crossed anyones mind?

but your question was did injuries really affect us..and the answer is YES

HoustonMatt
Registered

16 years ago

#33

Weren't we like 20 million under the cap? Seems to me we could have afforded some more depth.

I getting really tired of apologists. And people that don't hold people accountable for a bad job. It's like I just kicked your dog or something.

"slaket" wrote:

That $20 million was used to extend Rodgers and absorb as much of a cap hit this year as possible, thus placing us in better cap position for the next 6 years. Ted Thompson wanted to do the same with Jennings, but Jennings didn't want to talk extension until after the season.

blank

slaket
Registered

16 years ago

#34

How many out of of those 4 were able to be replaced with a decent quality player? This thread is about Ted Thompson. Why didn't he have any depth on defense?

"longtimefan" wrote:

"slaket" wrote:

Maybe Harrell turns into something, but why do you place trust in a guy that has been injured every year since he was in high school?

But i think you guys know how i feel about this, so i'll stop beating a dead horse and shut up about it.

It is was it is

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

16 years ago

#35

Jennings' refusal to talk extension during the season was thus probably a blessing in disguise, in that it freed Thompson to front-load the contract even more than he otherwise would have, had he been forced to pay Jennings as well.

HoustonMatt
Registered

16 years ago

#36

There are only so many players you can have at any given position. There are only 53 slots on the active roster. That's an average of 1.2 players per position on the field. If you go deep at one position, you MUST sacrifice depth at another.

Give a little thought before you post senseless rants, or you'll come across as the latest in the long line of irrational, foaming-at-the-mouth Thompson bashers.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

I'll take this one step further if you don't mind.

Tip for slaket: Next time something "seems" one way or another to you, stop, question your knowledge on the subject, analyze your deductive reasoning skills, challenge your own assumptions on your cognitive abilities, and then ask for a poster who's qualified to speak on the subject what they think before you make a ridiculous post. Otherwise you'll fall into the same trap that Nonstop mentioned above.

blank

slaket
Registered

16 years ago

#37

Nah, I don't want to sound like everyone else. Where's the fun in that?

Please stay on topic and refrain from personal advice. I can handle an internet message board just fine

It is was it is

packer98
Registered Topic Starter

16 years ago

#38

So then can we conclude that we have no depth and Sanders needs to go and Harrell was definitely a wasted pick at where we got him??

blank

macbob
Veteran Member

16 years ago

#39

"slaket" wrote:

I've stated the Pats argument all day in the chat room. People aren't really interested in hearing anything negative about Ted Thompson. Which I guess I understand to a point, but I still think it should be heard.

Ted Thompson did a terrible job this year on the defense.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:

Sanders did a terrible job this year on defense. Going into this year, defense was being touted as the strength of the team. Sander's scheme has issues, and there was way too much miscommunication on defense late in the year. That's not Thompson's fault. Not making Mike McCarthy make a change at DC would be...

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

16 years ago

#40

So then can we conclude that we have no depth and Sanders needs to go and Harrell was definitely a wasted pick at where we got him??

"packer98" wrote:

I think it's obvious from this and other threads that we CAN'T, so stop harping on it.

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

beast (14h) : Seems like he was just pissed because he was no longer the starter

beast (14h) : Campbell is right, he's rich and he doesn't have to explain sh!t... but that attitude gives teams reasons to never sign him again.

dfosterf (22-Feb) : I have some doubt about all that

dfosterf (22-Feb) : I read De'Vondre Campbell's tweet this morning (via the New York Post) Florio says that if he invested his earnings wisely, he will be good

beast (20-Feb) : I haven't followed, but I believe he's good when healthy, just hasn't been able to stay healthy.

dfosterf (20-Feb) : Hasn"t Bosa missed more games than he has played in the last 3 years?

Mucky Tundra (19-Feb) : He hasn't been too bad when healthy but I don't feel like I ever heard much about when he is

Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Felt like he was more interested in his body, than football. He flashed more than I expected

Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : When he was coming out, I thought he'd be flash in pan.

Mucky Tundra (19-Feb) : Joey seems so forgettable compared to his brother for some reason

Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : NFL informed teams today that the 2025 salary cap will be roughly $277.5M-$281.5M

Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Los Angeles Chargers are likely to release DE Joey Bosa this off-season as a cap casualty, per league source.

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : If the exploit is not fixed, we'll see tons of "50 top free agents, 50 perfect NFL team fits: We picked where each should sign in March" lo

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Issue should be solved, database cleaned and held strong working / meeting. Boom!

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : It should be halted now.

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : usually spambots are trying to get traffic to shady websites filled with spyware; the two links being spammed were to the Packers website

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : you know when you put it that way combined with the links it was spamming (to the official Packers website)

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yep. You can do that with holding down ENTER on a command in Console of browser

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : even with the rapid fire posts?

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : I'm not certain it's a bot.

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I've got to go to work soon which is a pity because I'm enthralled by this battle between the bot and Zero

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yeah, I see what that did. Kind of funny.

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : now it's a link to Wes Hodkiezwicz mailbag

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Now they're back with another topic

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : oh lol

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : I have a script that purges them now.

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : 118 Topics with Message.

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : what's 118 (besides a number)?

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : They got 118 slapped in there.

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : that's why it confused the hell out of me

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yeah, but this is taking a headline and slapping it into the Packers Talk

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Wasnt there a time guests could post in the help forum?

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : lol good question, kind of impressed!

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : So how is a guest posting?

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Tell them its an emergency

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Working. Meetings.

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Lots of fun; the spam goes back 4 or 5 pages by this point

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I thought you'd look for yourself and put 2 and 2 together lol. I overestimated ya ;)

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I thought Guests couldnt post?

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : And gosh that's gonna be fun to clean up! hahaa

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Oh. Why not just say that then? Geez.

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : check the main forum, seems a spam bot is running amok

Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : What?

Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Is the Packers online game "Packers Predict" now available for 2024? I can't tell

Zero2Cool (17-Feb) : Bengals planning to Franchise Tag Tamaurice Higgins

Zero2Cool (14-Feb) : Packers are hiring Luke Getsy as senior offensive assistant.

Martha Careful (12-Feb) : I would love to have them both, esp. Crosby, but either might be too expensive.

Zero2Cool (12-Feb) : Keisean Nixon is trying to get Maxx Crosby and Davante Adams lol

Mucky Tundra (11-Feb) : Yeah where did it go?

packerfanoutwest (11-Feb) : or did you resctrict access to that topic?

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

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22