Ranking top NFL GM's

[rodell330]

I don't hate TT nor am I bashing him but if he didn't take Rodgers he's not on this list. A lot of GM would still have jobs if they had taken Rodgers. We saw what the Patriots looked like without Brady and then what the Packers looked like without Rodgers so I don't wanna hear the "oh every team would struggle if they lost their franchise qb" because Cassel and Belliceck proved other wise still going 11-5? And Chicago looked just as good with mccown then cutler so..I believe Rodgers has covered up not only mm's deficiencies but TT's as well. How long did it take for the TT to finally get a running game behind him ? And as of right now the defense still sucks. If you put Rodgers in Minnesota ? even they win 11 games every yr. Put him in Detroit? They may even have advanced to at least a SB and won. Would be interesting to see how Teddy would fair without him..oh wait we have. I'm stating facts not bashing TT so his supporters need not over react.

 

[Carl]

I don't hate TT nor am I bashing him but if he didn't take Rodgers he's not on this list. A lot of GM would still have jobs if they had taken Rodgers. We saw what the Patriots looked like without Brady and then what the Packers looked like without Rodgers so I don't wanna hear the "oh every team would struggle if they lost their franchise qb" because Cassel and Belliceck proved other wise still going 11-5? And Chicago looked just as good with mccown then cutler so..I believe Rodgers has covered up not only mm's deficiencies but TT's as well. How long did it take for the TT to finally get a running game behind him ? And as of right now the defense still sucks. If you put Rodgers in Minnesota ? even they win 11 games every yr. Put him in Detroit? They may even have advanced to at least a SB and won. Would be interesting to see how Teddy would fair without him..oh wait we have. I'm stating facts not bashing TT so his supporters need not over react.

Can't pick out exceptions to teams winning with a hurt QB and call it the norm. Vikings, Colts, Chiefs, Redskins, Texans, Tampa Bay, and the Jets are all teams that have gotten much worse some time recently when their QB play got worse. Or just look at the Browns. They've had a solid defense for a for a few years, but their offense can't get over the QB situation. Some of these teams really went down the tubes for a season also.

Plus, those teams weren't down to their 3rd/4th string guys. How would the Bears have done with Jordan Palmer at QB?

 

[Ace]

I don't hate TT nor am I bashing him but if he didn't take Rodgers he's not on this list. A lot of GM would still have jobs if they had taken Rodgers. We saw what the Patriots looked like without Brady and then what the Packers looked like without Rodgers so I don't wanna hear the "oh every team would struggle if they lost their franchise qb" because Cassel and Belliceck proved other wise still going 11-5? And Chicago looked just as good with mccown then cutler so..I believe Rodgers has covered up not only mm's deficiencies but TT's as well. How long did it take for the TT to finally get a running game behind him ? And as of right now the defense still sucks. If you put Rodgers in Minnesota ? even they win 11 games every yr. Put him in Detroit? They may even have advanced to at least a SB and won. Would be interesting to see how Teddy would fair without him..oh wait we have. I'm stating facts not bashing TT so his supporters need not over react.

Serious ? here, I would be curious to find out how many GM's out there who has taken a team from 4-12 to the NFC Championship as quickly as he did, within 1 bad throw away from a SB birth? I understand that's a distant memory completely but I really am curious.

 

[El Guapo]

I believe Rodgers has covered up not only mm's deficiencies but TT's as well.

No surprise this came out of your mouth Rodell. You have completely ignored the games the Packers won without Rodgers when Flynn was around in previous years, choosing to latch onto the one season that they didn't have a viable QB backup option. There are no teams or GMs that have built teams that are fantastic at each position with quality backups for each one. Could it be better, yes. Is it as dramatically bad as you always like to make it sound? Not a chance.

Don't forget that Belichik struggles to find quality receivers for Brady. Brady saves his butt in that category year after year. Each GM and personnel department excels in some areas and lags behind in others.

 

[Pugger]

That one year when NE won without Brady was the exception rather than the rule. NE did have a winning season but didn't make the playoffs that year anyway. The top GMs like Belichick, Newsome and TT find a way to continue to win and restock their rosters while drafting near the end of every round. When Seattle and SF keep winning now that they must draft after us - and after they pay their QBs - then I'll place their GMs in the top 10.

 

[AmishMafia]

That one year when NE won without Brady was the exception rather than the rule. NE did have a winning season but didn't make the playoffs that year anyway. The top GMs like Belichick, Newsome and TT find a way to continue to win and restock their rosters while drafting near the end of every round. When Seattle and SF keep winning now that they must draft after us - and after they pay their QBs - then I'll place their GMs in the top 10.

That is what you don't get, Pugger - mediocrity is acceptable to Rodell. He would much rather have a mediocre team, not make the playoffs, as long as he had a GM willing to sign exciting FAs.

Its not good enough, however, for TT. And that is why he continues to work on improving the team for the long haul.