Where does Thompson rank as far as GMs go?

[DevilDon]

Detroit Lions. Your argument is invalid.

Fail, he didn't say you WOULD have a strong team, he said it was possible and thus a valid argument.
It certainly helps to have a decent FO and let's all give the Lions a round of applause for being the most fruitless of franchises around. It used to be the Bucs, what fun those Dreamsickle clad clowns were in the 80's and early 90's.

 

[HyponGrey]

Fail, he didn't say you WOULD have a strong team, he said it was possible and thus a valid argument.
It certainly helps to have a decent FO and let's all give the Lions a round of applause for being the most fruitless of franchises around. It used to be the Bucs, what fun those Dreamsickle clad clowns were in the 80's and early 90's.

Touche`

 

[El Guapo]

On that point, let's give the 49ers credit for being one of the few teams to effectively cultivate their volume of high draft picks into a good team. In Detroit those #1 receivers mostly washed out of the system except for Calvin Johnson. Most bad teams either squander those high picks or allow the high cost to slowly strangle the roster. I think it's too soon to credit the rookie salary cap, but maybe this is the start of teams being able to truly benefit from getting a top 5 pick in the draft - assuming they select wisely

 

[ivo610]

On that point, let's give the 49ers credit for being one of the few teams to effectively cultivate their volume of high draft picks into a good team. In Detroit those #1 receivers mostly washed out of the system except for Calvin Johnson. Most bad teams either squander those high picks or allow the high cost to slowly strangle the roster. I think it's too soon to credit the rookie salary cap, but maybe this is the start of teams being able to truly benefit from getting a top 5 pick in the draft - assuming they select wisely

Teams always benefited from getting a talented player in the top 5. The rookie cap is to prevent teams from getting wrecked when they select the wrong player in the top 5. It's not going to ruin them for years as before it did.

 

[texaspackerbacker]

How many of you TT-ophiles were around for the Mike Sherman era? As I have said, I was a defender of Thompson in the ancient days 6 or 7 years ago. I also was a big supporter of Mike Sherman - and using a lot of the same reasons and arguments you guys like to use for TT - chief among them a consistent long term very good won/lost percentage. Somehow that argument - I seem to recall 52 wins, 28 losses his first five years - didn't fly with the haters. I was just wondering where you guys stood back then.

 

[ivo610]

How many of you TT-ophiles were around for the Mike Sherman era? As I have said, I was a defender of Thompson in the ancient days 6 or 7 years ago. I also was a big supporter of Mike Sherman - and using a lot of the same reasons and arguments you guys like to use for TT - chief among them a consistent long term very good won/lost percentage. Somehow that argument - I seem to recall 52 wins, 28 losses his first five years - didn't fly with the haters. I was just wondering where you guys stood back then.

I think a common opinion was he was a good coach but a bad GM

 

[peteralan71]

SF has done very well building a team but they also were drafting pretty low for quite awhile. They are now going to be drafting high like they did last year. We will see how they do when they are picking in the upper 20s or 30s consistently. Also, they are going to have a salary cap storm coming sometime when all these Pro-Bowlers that were drafted by them want new contracts. They will have to trim the fat, so to speak. Especially if Kaepernick has a good season next year... Oofda.

 

[peteralan71]

AND San Francisco doesn't have all of their high draft picks going out with season ending injuries! Our last three (or more?) first round picks were all out with a season ending injury this year. Damn the luck!

 

[TJV]

How many of you TT-ophiles … didn't fly with the haters.

I’m going to take a wild-*** guess that you aren’t a graduate of the Dale Carnegie program.

I was a defender of Thompson in the ancient days 6 or 7 years ago. I also was a big supporter of Mike Sherman … I was just wondering where you guys stood back then.

You didn’t defend Thompson on this forum, did you? And since this thread deals with Thompson, how do you think Sherman did as a GM?

 

[texaspackerbacker]

I’m going to take a wild-*** guess that you aren’t a graduate of the Dale Carnegie program. You didn’t defend Thompson on this forum, did you? And since this thread deals with Thompson, how do you think Sherman did as a GM?

I’m going to take a wild-*** guess that you aren’t a graduate of the Dale Carnegie program. You didn’t defend Thompson on this forum, did you? And since this thread deals with Thompson, how do you think Sherman did as a GM?

That's a long time ago, but mostly I posted at jsonline then. I thought much the same about Sherman as a GM as I do about Thompson now - fairly good job retaining personnel, decent, not great at drafting, but not real dynamic when it came to free agency. The best thing you could say is the team was winning - same as now - and Sherman was under-appreciated as the cause. Oddly, Thompson in approximately the same circumstances, is - at least in this forum - over-appreciated as the cause for success IMO.

 

[TJV]

I thought much the same about Sherman as a GM as I do about Thompson now - fairly good job retaining personnel, decent, not great at drafting, but not real dynamic when it came to free agency.

This explains a lot. Sherman was not in the same league as Thompson as a GM. I fault Harlan (with an assist by Wolf) for promoting Sherman to GM and I don’t blame Sherman for accepting the promotion but he was completely unprepared for the GM job and it showed. “Not real dynamic when it came to free agency”? No. Sherman was bad at free agency: He paid Joe Johnson $36M for two sacks in two seasons, Mark Roman was bad, and so were Hannibal Navies, and Hardy Nickerson. The Bleacher Report attributes three of the worst five Packers free agent signings to Sherman, and he was only GM for three years. He left the team in salary cap hell which Thompson worked quickly to correct. Thompson, who trained to be a GM for more than a decade scored in free agency with the Woodson and Pickett signings, struck out on some too, and to the chagrin of many Packers fans avoids the big name free agency frenzy. But the difference was Thompson never crippled the team with a FA signing.

Do these names look familiar?

1. Ahmad Carroll, Joey Thomas, Donnell Washington, BJ Sander, Corey Williams, Scott Wells.
2. Nick Barnett, Kenny Peterson, James Lee, Hunter Hillenmeyer, Brennan Curtin, Chris Johnson, DeAndrew Rubin, Carl Ford, Steve Josue.
3. Javon Walker, Marques Anderson, Najeh Davenport, Aaron Kampmann, Craig Nall, Mike Houghton.

Those of course are the players Sherman picked in the three drafts he was in charge of. Comparing these draftees favorably to Thompson’s success in the draft is a joke. And BTW, the trade up for BJ Sander is one of the colossally stupid moves in Packers’ draft history. (Again, not his fault but) Sherman was in way over his head. And keep in mind Thompson kept the scouting and personnel departments in place after Sherman’s departure – the difference was the man in charge.

I appreciate your honesty about how you evaluate Sherman as GM but IMO your equating his term as GM with Thompson’s is the result of either a bias against Thompson or poor evaluation skills. And it makes your name calling of those of us who, while acknowledging Thompson's mistakes, recognize the obvious difference between the two funny.

 

[texaspackerbacker]

hahaha OK, you win, Sherman was a lousy GM. When I brought him up, though, I was referring to his history as a coach, and the venomous crap spewed by his haters prior to and after his firing. The idea that the standard should be a solid winning record now being applied to Thompson was definitely NOT applied to Sherman when he was fired as coach. I was just wondering if any of the lovers of TT in here were (and if so would own up to) being among those irrational Sherman haters. Let me anticipate the comeback here: Sherman couldn't be fired as GM but retained as coach. To that, I would say, why the hell not?

 

[TJV]

When I brought him up, though, I was referring to his history as a coach...

I thought much the same about Sherman as a GM as I do about Thompson now

Not a big deal but I specifically asked what you thought of Sherman as a GM and that is how you answered it.

Let me anticipate the comeback here: Sherman couldn't be fired as GM but retained as coach. To that, I would say, why the hell not?

He was fired as GM and retained as HC. Harlan insisted that the new GM would retain Sherman as HC. I heard Harlan interviewed on WTMJ years later and he said it was Sherman who wouldn't work with Thompson - no doubt because his pride was hurt by being fired from the GM job. Harlan all but said Sherman was a pr!ck to Thompson. I'm certainly not saying Thompson wouldn't have wanted to bring in his own guy as HC but according to Harlan, who loved Sherman's work ethic and appreciation of the Packers' history, Sherman made the decision to fire him easy.

I thought Sherman was a pretty good HC. I loved his U-71 formation (OT Kevin Barry lined up in the traditional TE spot on the right and the TE flanked him and they ran it down opponents’ throats). IMO he fell down at times with in-game decisions and in my opinion his biggest failing as HC on O was his inability to reign in Favre.

I was against Sherman's promotion to GM because IMO both jobs are too much for almost any man. (Guys like Belichick are the rare exception IMO.) I didn’t want anyone to assume both jobs and thought Harlan’s stroke of genius after becoming president was creating the “one man in charge of football operations” job that he hired Wolf to fill. I thought it was a mistake to go away from that organizational structure that had worked so well. Again according to Harlan, what finally convinced him to replace Sherman as GM was he thought Sherman spent so much time and energy on the Mike McKenzie’s hold out mess, he neglected his HC job. I honestly don't remember a lot of vitriol directed at Sherman. As I remember it the consensus of the majority of Packers fans was Sherman was a good man.

 

[texaspackerbacker]

Not a big deal but I specifically asked what you thought of Sherman as a GM and that is how you answered it.He was fired as GM and retained as HC. Harlan insisted that the new GM would retain Sherman as HC. I heard Harlan interviewed on WTMJ years later and he said it was Sherman who wouldn't work with Thompson - no doubt because his pride was hurt by being fired from the GM job. Harlan all but said Sherman was a pr!ck to Thompson. I'm certainly not saying Thompson wouldn't have wanted to bring in his own guy as HC but according to Harlan, who loved Sherman's work ethic and appreciation of the Packers' history, Sherman made the decision to fire him easy.

I thought Sherman was a pretty good HC. I loved his U-71 formation (OT Kevin Barry lined up in the traditional TE spot on the right and the TE flanked him and they ran it down opponents’ throats). IMO he fell down at times with in-game decisions and in my opinion his biggest failing as HC on O was his inability to reign in Favre.

I was against Sherman's promotion to GM because IMO both jobs are too much for almost any man. (Guys like Belichick are the rare exception IMO.) I didn’t want anyone to assume both jobs and thought Harlan’s stroke of genius after becoming president was creating the “one man in charge of football operations” job that he hired Wolf to fill. I thought it was a mistake to go away from that organizational structure that had worked so well. Again according to Harlan, what finally convinced him to replace Sherman as GM was he thought Sherman spent so much time and energy on the Mike McKenzie’s hold out mess, he neglected his HC job. I honestly don't remember a lot of vitriol directed at Sherman. As I remember it the consensus of the majority of Packers fans was Sherman was a good man.

Yeah, I fell into your trap by answering your question. Honestly, when I referred to Sherman, I wasn't even thinking of him as a GM. I also honestly don't recall whether I was for or against his being promoted to the dual position. In hindsight, yeah, I see it as a mistake also. As for the thing about Harlan offering to keep Sherman on as coach and his refusing, I'll take your word for it if you are sure, but I don't recall ever hearing about that. I do, however, recall that a solid majority of fans posting in forums were detractors of Sherman.

 

[adambr2]

This explains a lot. Sherman was not in the same league as Thompson as a GM. I fault Harlan (with an assist by Wolf) for promoting Sherman to GM and I don’t blame Sherman for accepting the promotion but he was completely unprepared for the GM job and it showed. “Not real dynamic when it came to free agency”? No. Sherman was bad at free agency: He paid Joe Johnson $36M for two sacks in two seasons, Mark Roman was bad, and so were Hannibal Navies, and Hardy Nickerson. The Bleacher Report attributes three of the worst five Packers free agent signings to Sherman, and he was only GM for three years. He left the team in salary cap hell which Thompson worked quickly to correct. Thompson, who trained to be a GM for more than a decade scored in free agency with the Woodson and Pickett signings, struck out on some too, and to the chagrin of many Packers fans avoids the big name free agency frenzy. But the difference was Thompson never crippled the team with a FA signing.

Do these names look familiar?

1. Ahmad Carroll, Joey Thomas, Donnell Washington, BJ Sander, Corey Williams, Scott Wells.
2. Nick Barnett, Kenny Peterson, James Lee, Hunter Hillenmeyer, Brennan Curtin, Chris Johnson, DeAndrew Rubin, Carl Ford, Steve Josue.
3. Javon Walker, Marques Anderson, Najeh Davenport, Aaron Kampmann, Craig Nall, Mike Houghton.

Those of course are the players Sherman picked in the three drafts he was in charge of. Comparing these draftees favorably to Thompson’s success in the draft is a joke. And BTW, the trade up for BJ Sander is one of the colossally stupid moves in Packers’ draft history. (Again, not his fault but) Sherman was in way over his head. And keep in mind Thompson kept the scouting and personnel departments in place after Sherman’s departure – the difference was the man in charge.

I appreciate your honesty about how you evaluate Sherman as GM but IMO your equating his term as GM with Thompson’s is the result of either a bias against Thompson or poor evaluation skills. And it makes your name calling of those of us who, while acknowledging Thompson's mistakes, recognize the obvious difference between the two funny.

I agree 100%. I am flabbergasted, no offense intended, that anyone could ever find Sherman and Thompson to be comparable as GM's. TT is one of the best in the business. Sherman was a boy in a man's world. He was completely out of his league as a GM. I've often said that Wolf's biggest mistake was given Sherman the GM reins. Wolf did so many good things for this franchise over the years, but passing the torch to Sherman was costly for several years.

There was nothing good about Sherman as GM. He went after aging overpriced FA's, he panicked in the draft and traded up when he was worried that "his guy" was about to come off the board, and he let some promising guys walk while giving long-term deals to guys with talent but no work ethic (Hunt). He, like anyone with access to a mock draft could do, occasionally ran into the good pick like Aaron Kampman.

I thought Sherman was a good HC in some regards. There were some things about him I didn't really care for personally. I felt that he was a bit arrogant and lacked accountability when things went wrong. (MM messes up, but he's not afraid to tell you when he does feel he messed up). The Donatell scapegoating was an example of that, and his demeanor towards Thompson in their only year working together generally reflects a pretty **** poor unprofessional attitude.

 

[TJV]

As for the thing about Harlan offering to keep Sherman on as coach and his refusing, I'll take your word for it if you are sure, but I don't recall ever hearing about that.

I'm not sure what you mean here. Thompson was hired as GM in January of 2005. Mike Sherman was HC of the Packers from 2000 through the 2005 season, so during the 2005 season Thompson was GM and Sherman was the HC. Sherman never refused to stay on as HC, he stayed on as HC in 2005 after having his GM title taken away and after the 2005 season he was fired as HC by Thompson.

Here's a pretty good article on that period of Packers history:
http://espnmilwaukee.com/common/more.php?m=49&action=blog&r=40&post_id=7571

 

[texaspackerbacker]

Jack, you said "I heard Harlan interviewed on WTMJ years later and he said it was Sherman who wouldn't work with Thompson - no doubt because his pride was hurt by being fired from the GM job. Harlan all but said Sherman was a pr!ck to Thompson. I'm certainly not saying Thompson wouldn't have wanted to bring in his own guy as HC but according to Harlan, who loved Sherman's work ethic and appreciation of the Packers' history, Sherman made the decision to fire him easy." I guess maybe I misinterpreted that to mean Sherman forced the firing by refusing to stay on with Thompson as GM. Anyway, that's 8 years ago. My mind has shelved it in the ancient archives. Funny thing about getting old hahaha, I can remember the Lombardi years and Bengston and heaven forbid, Devine, and even the Starr and Gregg years better than Holmgren up to McCarthy.

 

[PWT]

Jack, you said "I heard Harlan interviewed on WTMJ years later and he said it was Sherman who wouldn't work with Thompson - no doubt because his pride was hurt by being fired from the GM job. Harlan all but said Sherman was a pr!ck to Thompson. I'm certainly not saying Thompson wouldn't have wanted to bring in his own guy as HC but according to Harlan, who loved Sherman's work ethic and appreciation of the Packers' history, Sherman made the decision to fire him easy." I guess maybe I misinterpreted that to mean Sherman forced the firing by refusing to stay on with Thompson as GM. Anyway, that's 8 years ago. My mind has shelved it in the ancient archives. Funny thing about getting old hahaha, I can remember the Lombardi years and Bengston and heaven forbid, Devine, and even the Starr and Gregg years better than Holmgren up to McCarthy.

"tpb"
I suggest you get two books :

1.) Green and Golden Moments Bob Harlan of the Green Bay Packers written by Bob Harlan and Dale Hofmann copyright 2007. It will give info what happened to Packer franchise from 1971 to 2006 , which is when Dan Devine was hiredb yPackers . also in 1971 Dan Devine hired
Bob Harlan to be his assistant . Bob Harlan held about every position in Packer front office during the period from 1971 to 2007.

2.) The Packer Way Nine Stepping Stones to building a
Winning organization by Ron Wolf Executive Vice president and General Manager of Packers and Paul Attner
copyright 1998

Both books are available online from Amazon .com
Both books are available in new and used copies. Used copies are available for minimal cost.

From reading your posts on this topic, you could use the real information available in these books.

"PWT" born and raised in Green Bay and now l live in De Pere . I was around when "Curly was still running Packers in the 1940's.

 

[toolkien]

Someone feels the need to defend Mike Sherman? Miss the part where in his entire career as a head coach (since getting the Packer head coaching position coupled with the TAM position), he's +16 in winning margin? And he got that margin with the 2001 + 2002 season, mostly with Favre playing a decent level and a team mostly constructed by Ron Wolf. Otherwise, with the Packers and with Texas A&M, he's exactly .500 (and got no bowl victories with TAM). And how did TAM do last year, just one year removed from Sherman? Sherman was mediocre as a coach, bad as a GM, but had an ego the size of his butt. He prima donna'd his way out of an opportunity with the Arizona Cardinals by asking for a ridiculous amount of money, and he came in #2 behind the inspiring **** Jauron for the Bills' job. And then goes .500 with TAM, and gets fired by phone (apparently nobody wanted to deal with him face to face). Sherman is the walking embodiment of mediocre but has an ego all of proportion for that "success". And last year the Dolphins were dreadful on offense - it was the defense that gave them their mediocre record.

As for Thompson, he inherited Sherman's slow, dumb, and overpaid team, along with a Favre who was squarely in prima donna mode, and got the Packers back to the NFC championship game in short order and has had arguably the second best team in the league the last 4 years. Thompson was with the Packers in the 90's turnaround phase, earning two promotions along the way, went out the Seattle to build a Super Bowl appearing team with out their with the "Packers West", and came back and got the Packers back pointing north in short order (while Seattle sank). Wherever TT has been on the payroll the last 20+ years, those teams have been making the playoffs consistently, in conference championship games regularly, in the Super Bowl often enough, and winning a decent portion of those.

 

[El Guapo]

As an ardant TT fan, my unwaivering opinion of Sherman was that he was a good coach with Ron Wolf's players but reduced to a marginal coach when faced with coaching the players he drafted as GM from 2002-2004. Aside from drafting poorly and completely ignoring the offensive line, he was the what most anti-Thompson fans argue for...an active player in the free agent market. Some of his free agent disasters were DE Joe Johnson, S Mark Roman, and LB Hannibal Naives. What all of those terrible signings did was hamstring the Packers' cap position for years to come, including into the beginning of the TT era.

I don't know if TT is good or not at evaluating the big name talent. If he is and chooses not to, that maybe be out of irrational fear or an intent and belief in his build-from-the-draft philosophy. If he recognizes that he's not great at judging free agents in the market, and therefore choosing not to play a game that he knows he is not good at, all the better.

 

[texaspackerbacker]

I guess I was the one defending Sherman hahaha - sort of. I accept the idea that he did a lousy job as GM, but I think there was way too much hate spewed against him as coach. I don't give a damn what he did at A & M or why he wasn't hired for other jobs. He was 52-28 in five regular seasons for the Packers, and that is damn good.

 

[El Guapo]

Totally agree. He coached some great teams for Green Bay. We were always contending. My only criticism of Sherman as a coach is his handling of Favre.

Holmgren was Irv Favre-North to Brett. When Mike left (I'll disregard the throw-away 1998 season), Sherman put Favre on a pedestal. Favre's play and personality reflected that treatment. He didn't play well unless challenged by the media and the other team, because he wasn't challenged by his own coaching staff. Teams dared Favre to beat them. Give credit to Ahman Green and the Packers rushing attack, but Sherman had a hand in creating the diva that we all came to know as Brett Favre.

That's one coaching criticism on top of a lot of good things that Mike Sherman did as coach. Had he been left as coach and not GM, it's possible that he could still be guiding Green Bay to divisional titles and not whatever he's doing today.

 

[AmishMafia]

Sherman: I can think of times when he was really brilliant as a coach, and other times when he was horrible. As a GM, he was mostly bad. If you are going to support him as a coach, you have to look at his entire career and also include his final season, 4-12. His record with the Packers was 57-39.
The seasons are:

2000 9-7
2001 12-4
2002 12-4
2003 10-6
2004 10-6
2005 4-12

Also, when it mattered the most, the Packers did the worst: 2-4 in playoffs.

It isn't the record necessarily, its that the team definitely showed a progression of getting worse with every season. Foolish GM moves and an inability to motivate/develop talent was apparent. His biggest failing as a HC, IMHO, was probably his inability to properly manage the players. Allowing Favre free reign on the field as well as in the locker room was his biggest mistake.



Posted before I read El Guapo above - you said it better than I.

 

[ivo610]

I guess I was the one defending Sherman hahaha - sort of. I accept the idea that he did a lousy job as GM, but I think there was way too much hate spewed against him as coach. I don't give a damn what he did at A & M or why he wasn't hired for other jobs. He was 52-28 in five regular seasons for the Packers, and that is damn good.

As Amish mentions, why ignore the 4-12 season? Seems pretty convenient

 

[adambr2]

Agreed, you can't discount the 4-12 season, especially when it was mostly of his own doing.

Sherman was a decent coach in some regards. He's not, IMO, in the same discussion as Holmgren or even McCarthy. I also found his lack of responsibility and accountability to be very distasteful.