http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...d-a-team/b0341f2d-c34e-4882-8617-d5ca9ae3355d
I like that he says you can have a successful year without winning the SB
I like that he says you can have a successful year without winning the SB
I absolutely hate that argument. Well if we wouldn't of had that player we would suck. What were the dolphins without Marino, What were the 49ers without Montana and then eventually Young. What were the Broncos without Elway. They are all teams that would suck. Coaches and management are defined by their players. If Bill Belechick did not have Brady he would probably be fired and considered a terrible coach. Belechick 2000 season 5-11 Tom Brady's rookie year. After that they go 11-5 and win the superbowl and have continued success. Now once that sinks in ask yourselves why we have Aaron Rodgers. We have Aaron Rodgers because he luckily fell to us and we have management that looks to the future 3-4 years down the road. I guarantee that every Packer fan during that draft would of rathered taken a player other than a QB to help the Packers try to win a superbowl with Favre at the helm. You want to know what would have happened. We would have sucked as soon as Brett Favre left. Probably for a long time. Instead we went back to instant success. Now we can win for the next 10 years because TT was smart enough to look forward into the future and draft a QB.There's two ways of looking at this: One is that we have such an outstanding winning record the past few seasons, most of the Thompson era, so they must be doing it the best way, etc. The other is that Thompson, McCarthy, ALL of us got incredibly lucky that Aaron Rodgers turned out to be so absolutely super, and without him or if he had even just been a normal good QB, the team would stink. I kinda go back and forth on this. In the past, I was always opposed to signing other people's star free agents for the big money. On the other hand, you look what some other teams have done, and you look up and down this Packer roster, it's shaky at best if you get beyond Rodgers and Matthews and maybe a couple of receivers who arguably are what they are because of Rodgers.
IMO it's fair to say the consensus in the league is that Thompson has built a team with a deep roster, that he excels in the draft and even in acquiring UDFAs. Some Packers fans complain about all the good players the Packers "let leave" for other teams. So which is it texaspackerbacker? Is Thompson good at drafting? Do the Packers have a deep team? Or is it just two players and bunch of no-names?...you look up and down this Packer roster, it's shaky at best if you get beyond Rodgers and Matthews and maybe a couple of receivers who arguably are what they are because of Rodgers.
There's two ways of looking at this: One is that we have such an outstanding winning record the past few seasons, most of the Thompson era, so they must be doing it the best way, etc. The other is that Thompson, McCarthy, ALL of us got incredibly lucky that Aaron Rodgers turned out to be so absolutely super, and without him or if he had even just been a normal good QB, the team would stink. I kinda go back and forth on this. In the past, I was always opposed to signing other people's star free agents for the big money. On the other hand, you look what some other teams have done, and you look up and down this Packer roster, it's shaky at best if you get beyond Rodgers and Matthews and maybe a couple of receivers who arguably are what they are because of Rodgers.
We all know SF is good, and will be for a couple more seasons, but when it comes time to pay those big names to stay and those coming off of rookie contracts, wave "bye-bye" to half your damn team.
This is the difference right here. TT and Murphy work to build a competitive team that never has only a "window" of opportunity. Nothing should slam shut because they don't mortgage the future for the sake of winning it all today. They've shown that you can win the SB with this method and still remain competitive. Teams that get the big free agents do and will have a window, that will eventually close.And hopefully our window of opportunity hasn't slammed shut before SF's does. If SF wins the next one or two Super Bowls which they have an excellent chance of doing then they may say it was worth the price.
It's a different method for achieving success. Neither method is proven. If so, there wouldn't be much of an argument. I won't stoop down to calling believers in the other method as having puny heads. They just believe that free agency will produce a better outcome.DevilDon said:I had to LOL at the comments at the end of the article. Some people just can't get it through their puny heads.
IMO it's fair to say the consensus in the league is that Thompson has built a team with a deep roster, that he excels in the draft and even in acquiring UDFAs. Some Packers fans complain about all the good players the Packers "let leave" for other teams. So which is it texaspackerbacker? Is Thompson good at drafting? Do the Packers have a deep team? Or is it just two players and bunch of no-names?
and when you have a team chalked full of huge names on both sides of the ball, yeah you might be a power house (SF) or, you may end up like a certain "dream team" did (PHI). Or, worse, you may be caked full with talent and then have no QB and screw your cap for the unforeseen future.....(raiders and Al Davis RIP)
We all know SF is good, and will be for a couple more seasons, but when it comes time to pay those big names to stay and those coming off of rookie contracts, wave "bye-bye" to half your damn team.
I absolutely hate that argument. Well if we wouldn't of had that player we would suck. What were the dolphins without Marino, What were the 49ers without Montana and then eventually Young. What were the Broncos without Elway. They are all teams that would suck. Coaches and management are defined by their players. If Bill Belechick did not have Brady he would probably be fired and considered a terrible coach. Belechick 2000 season 5-11 Tom Brady's rookie year. After that they go 11-5 and win the superbowl and have continued success. Now once that sinks in ask yourselves why we have Aaron Rodgers. We have Aaron Rodgers because he luckily fell to us and we have management that looks to the future 3-4 years down the road. I guarantee that every Packer fan during that draft would of rathered taken a player other than a QB to help the Packers try to win a superbowl with Favre at the helm. You want to know what would have happened. We would have sucked as soon as Brett Favre left. Probably for a long time. Instead we went back to instant success. Now we can win for the next 10 years because TT was smart enough to look forward into the future and draft a QB.
Well we will just have to disagree on that one. I think Rodgers is our bread and butter and players like him come along very seldom. We need to take advantage of his skills before they erode and they will. I don't know and neither do you what type of team we will have 3-5 years from now or even if Thompson will be around.This is the difference right here. TT and Murphy work to build a competitive team that never has only a "window" of opportunity. Nothing should slam shut because they don't mortgage the future for the sake of winning it all today. They've shown that you can win the SB with this method and still remain competitive. Teams that get the big free agents do and will have a window, that will eventually close.
Well we will just have to disagree on that one. I think Rodgers is our bread and butter and players like him come along very seldom. We need to take advantage of his skills before they erode and they will. I don't know and neither do you what type of team we will have 3-5 years from now or even if Thompson will be around.
I think there is a gap now between The Packers and the 49ers and perhaps even the Falcons. To me it's not about just being competitive it's about winning the Super Bowl. I don't want the Packers only being able to get to playoff games but winning them rather than being crushed like the last two seasons.
You really think the Falcons are better?
Look at the last 7 Superbowl's. 6 of them were draft and develop teams who, correct me if I'm wrong (and I am sure you will), were not big FA signers. You could even consider the 3 patriots teams that won the Superbowl as draft and develop. The 49er's were developed thru the Draft.
Look at the last 7 Superbowl's. 6 of them were draft and develop teams who, correct me if I'm wrong (and I am sure you will), were not big FA signers. You could even consider the 3 patriots teams that won the Superbowl as draft and develop. The 49er's were developed thru the Draft.
There is a broad potential field of activity between the Philly Dream Team's raft of highly paid FA signings vs. doing nothing to plug a hole or two in the starting line-up. The more I hear "dream team" as an excuse for not signing one moderately priced starter to plug a hole, the more it sounds like an excuse, not an explanation.
The fact of the matter is Murphy and Co. are stuck until the Rodgers and Matthews deals get done, and even then there may not be much cap left. Signing Brad Jones shot all of the *** their willing shoot. But that's necessity, not philosophy, and we've lost a number of impact defensive players since 2010 without
At the same time, we're carrying the following cap hits this year:
Tramon Williams: $8.5 mil
Finley: $8.25 mil
Pickett: $6.7 mil
Raji: $6.6 mil
Hawk: $5.2 mil
Crosby: $3.2 mil
Kuhn: $2.5 mil
Net-net, that's not very good value.
By contrast, if you compare Seattle's drafts and selective FA acquisitions over the past few 3 years with Schneider on the scene, and compare their work to ours, it gives one pause.
And the 49ers are adding to their draft bounty with key free agents. The Pats have been active in free agency over the years.
Probably as I said. They have added to a very good team with off season acquisitions. And they were better than the Packers last year. I like your substantive posts btw
Those who can't add substance sit back and snipe.I'm glad that you enjoyed my post! And even went so far as to dislike it just because I disliked your other post!
Those who can't add substance sit back and snipe.