A great Sherman Pick

[Chamuko]

http://greenbaypressgazette.packersnews.com/archives/news/pack_23667061.shtml

The only bad news is that he was cut in order to keep 2 punters in the roster.... and he is starting for Da Bears.....

I really liked this guy and I was really upset when Shermy cut him....The point is this guy was intelligent enough to see that Shermy is a narrow minded guy that was not open to see him as a real option which Lovie Smith did...

This is one more of many many issues why I believe Shermy should be canned..

 

[sixone220]

He’s not doing the same thing for the Packers because of a rash of injuries at wide receiver during the regular-season opener in 2003 that caused Sherman to re-sign Antonio Freeman and Chris Jackson. Sherman opted to waive Hillenmeyer, hoping no team would claim him off waivers, and he would come back as a member of the practice squad.

Because of keeping a 2nd punter is merely your opinion.

 

[Bruce]

He’s not doing the same thing for the Packers because of a rash of injuries at wide receiver during the regular-season opener in 2003 that caused Sherman to re-sign Antonio Freeman and Chris Jackson. Sherman opted to waive Hillenmeyer, hoping no team would claim him off waivers, and he would come back as a member of the practice squad.

Because of keeping a 2nd punter is merely your opinion.

Of course you are correct, but don't expect the facts to get in the way of a Sherman rant.

I understand everyone's frustration with this season and am not surprised that much of it is targeted at Mike Sherman.

However, more than any other factor the irrational hatred spewed in so many posts regarding a Hard Working man who is doing the best that he can and certainly did not hire himself, gets so old I can hardly bring myself to wade though the constant negative posts, to participate in this and several other forums.

I come to a forum to talk football and exchange ideas --not to read the same tired rants about Sherman or his assistance. Having said this I will be accused of being a Sherman lover or apologist. Frankly, I am not sure what his fate should be at this point -- but for right now he is our team's Head Coach. How can it be so hard to wait for the season to end and let Thompson and/or Sherman make whatever decision they are going to make?

I have no problem with any one who thinks it is time for Sherman to go, but do they really need to create thread after thread saying the same thing over and over --worse yet highjack other threads and turn them into "I hate Sherman" threads?

I like Chamuko and do not mean to single him out, but I know other scouts and writers who are saying that they refuse to visit forums for the same reasons I am stating.

At Packer Chatters most of the best posters have retreated to a controlled invitation only forum for the same reason.

I know and face that all forum will struggle with being infected by trolls, but it sad when the trolls are too often the Packer fans themselves.

 

[GBnative]

Maybe I am confused or missing some point, but wasn't Hillemeyer picked in the 2003 draft, while Sander was picked in 2004. Hillemeyer was long gone before Sander ever took up a roster spot. What does losing Hillemeyer have to do with 2 punters on the roster?

 

[Buckeyepackfan]

Don't confuse the rant of a "True Packer Fan" with facts guys, they will only claim that
"IT'S ALL SHERMANS FAULT!!!!!
"IT'S ALL SHERMANS FAULT!!!!!
"IT'S ALL SHERMANS FAULT!!!!!
"IT'S ALL SHERMANS FAULT!!!!!
"IT'S ALL SHERMANS FAULT!!!!!
"IT'S ALL SHERMANS FAULT!!!!!

 

[Bobby Roberts]

It was unfortunate that Hillenmeyer could not have stayed with GB. At the time HH was the #7 LB on the roster behind backups Lenon, Marshall and Wilkins. HH made the opening day roster because Marshall had to serve a 4 game suspension for his drug violation.

Marshall clearly out-played HH during pre-season that year and at the time it appeared that he was ready to step up to possibly be a starter. In order to have Marshall return to the team, someone needed to be cut and it didn't make sense to keep 7 health LBs. HH was #7 and was cut in a numbers game.

I've made these facts clear in previous responses to other postings from Chamuko, but it's obviously still necessary to repeat.

While being the GM, Sherman made several mistakes but also make some good decisions. I have no problem with pointing out his errors, but this is no place for outright lies.

 

[TOPackerFan]

Hey Chamuko, nice try, but Sander was picked in 2004 and Hillenmeyer was picked and released in 2003. Keeping Sander on the roster had nothing to do with it.

 

[Chamuko]

Well it seems that I owe you all an apology.. sorry for the mistake, yes I am very upset on this season and maybe I have been turning every day a little bit more bitter regarding Sherman and Rossley...

Sorry again..

 

[tromadz]

well bottom line, Sherman was a HORRIBLE GM, and we will pay the price for that for a year or two. TT can't fix all of his mistakes in one year.

 

[CaliforniaCheez]

With the Hillenmeyer release the Packers were able to keep Jamal Reynolds on the roster. Wolf and Thompson both seem to not worry about the cap hit of getting rid of a mistakes quickly and keeping the younger talent.

Sherman as GM avoided cap hits. Sherman traded away a draft pick to move up and take Hillenmeyer, gave him a 100K signing bonus, then cut him.

Ideally there should be some balance in these decisions. Another beauty was keeping Derick Combs on final cuts at a cost of 7th round pick in 2005, and cutting Frank Winters. There was little O-line back up and Sherman was lucky in 03 that linemen did not get hurt. Combs was cut before the bill was due.

Many posts have been written about Sherman as a rookie GM and no experience at that side of the business screwed up. Bob Harlan did the right thing and came out as a nice guy concerned about Sherman's health and citing health woes of coaches.

Hillenmeyer will remain as a reminder of Sherman as GM. He will be motivated in every game against the Packers. I can't blame or say anything bad about him as it was not his fault. He is a good player.

 

[Obi1]

Bruce wrote;

"...I come to a forum to talk football and exchange ideas --not to read the same tired rants about Sherman or his assistance. Having said this I will be accused of being a Sherman lover or apologist. Frankly, I am not sure what his fate should be at this point -- but for right now he is our team's Head Coach. How can it be so hard to wait for the season to end and let Thompson and/or Sherman make whatever decision they are going to make?..."

Ryan, did you read this? From the MOST respected poster in this board???

May be if the Sherman Ranters can have an "Official" SHERMAN RANT post as you did with the Reggie Bush posts, we'd have knowledgeable posters like Bruce posting here more often!

 

[DePack]

Chamuka.....you are the first person to ever make a mistake on this forum!!!!!

No need to apologize, we all make mistakes. As one of the last Sherman supporters (they are a dying breed-maybe rightfully so), I hereby give you complete dispensation from this error.....just say 5 Our Fathers and 5 Hail Marys.

Now...it's Friday afternoon.....let the libations flow.

 

[Chamuko]

Ok De Pack,, thanks a lot..can I get one tequila shot after every Hail Mary and 2 after every Our Father ???

 

[P@ck66]

So...what are you saying OB1..that Sherman is somehow "off-limits" in a forum discussion and that "some posters" here are better than others....?

and that you don't want to hear or see certain ideas that you disagree with posted on "your" forum...?

gee..sounds alot like elitism and censorship to me...

and maybe certain posters here...(who are deemed too good to be amongst us common rabble)....think that they can talk about football without talking about coaching (and in an odd way with our current predicament that makes sense--there's been alot of people not wanting to talk about the pink elephant in the room--SherRossley..), BUT that just underscores my point Bruce...

The coaching IS the problem...(and has been for 5 years now..) Whether you refuse to see it or not...it is a fact...

(I did not like Sherman since day one..i thought he was a poor choice and his decision making and preparation, etc...has not changed my mind one iota in 5 years..)

and I do not care if he is hardworking..and that he did not "hire himself"...

That does not put him above the Green Bay Packer organization...and that does not change the fact that he SUCKS as a HC too..(as well as GM), hires incompetent people around him, and basically does not know the game of football very well...imo...

Bruce..your beloved coach Sherman is mediocre at best....(and i'm being generous here..)

(What are we supposed to do....ignore reality?)

 

[Bruce]

Pack66 -- are you seriously trying to sell the idea that every person on the face of the earth has not heard that you hate Mike Sherman and your endless insults at least 2000 times? My god man, have you ever gone through a day in the last 5 years without this kind of babble at least a dozen times?

He is not my "beloved Sherman" and he is not above question or critic. The point is that it gets more than old to listen to the same cries and complaints over and over and you, and many like you, become obsessed to the point that it makes serious football discussion almost impossible.

I told you a long time ago, that whether or not Sherman continues in the job is a decison that will made within the organization -- now by Ted Thompson. Whining and *****ing endlessly will not change that fact. I also told you if they go another direction I will bid Mike adieu and support whoever is brought in to replace him. Like you I thought it was a stretch to hire him as a head coach and a bigger stretch to give him GM responsibilities. The fact is Ron Wolf did both -- I have great respect for Ron and am not arrogant enough to think I know more than him.

Football is a team sport -- you win together and you lose together. Finger pointing and scapegoating is for losers, just as whining and *****ing about things you have no control over is weak and senseless. Mike Sherman is the current head coach of the Team I support. There is less than 0% chance that will change before the end of the season. Would it be so hard to make your comments once and then let them go? Or to dance with the team (coach, players and front office) you have rather than the one you wish you had?

You are not without some football knowledge, but your obsession with hating Mike Sherman begins to border on serious mental illness, and discredits almost everything you write.

The suggestion that forming a Sherman bashing forum is a good one. You and your cronies can spew as much negativity, finger pointing and blaming as you like -- and slap each other on the back as you go. And when you feel like having real football discussions come and join the rest of the folks who want to talk football -- not your obsession!

So...what are you saying OB1..that Sherman is somehow "off-limits" in a forum discussion and that "some posters" here are better than others....?

and that you don't want to hear or see certain ideas that you disagree with posted on "your" forum...?

gee..sounds alot like elitism and censorship to me...

and maybe certain posters here...(who are deemed too good to be amongst us common rabble)....think that they can talk about football without talking about coaching (and in an odd way with our current predicament that makes sense--there's been alot of people not wanting to talk about the pink elephant in the room--SherRossley..), BUT that just underscores my point Bruce...

The coaching IS the problem...(and has been for 5 years now..) Whether you refuse to see it or not...it is a fact...

(I did not like Sherman since day one..i thought he was a poor choice and his decision making and preparation, etc...has not changed my mind one iota in 5 years..)

and I do not care if he is hardworking..and that he did not "hire himself"...

That does not put him above the Green Bay Packer organization...and that does not change the fact that he SUCKS as a HC too..(as well as GM), hires incompetent people around him, and basically does not know the game of football very well...imo...

Bruce..your beloved coach Sherman is mediocre at best....(and i'm being generous here..)

(What are we supposed to do....ignore reality?)

 

[Zero2Cool]

The hate towards sherman over and over is almost as tiresome as hearing about T.O. ... at times its just ENOUGH ALREADY. a dead horse is dead no need to keep beating it

 

[Raider Pride]

Bruce,

You typed in the above post.. "I like Chamuko and do not mean to single him out, but I know other scouts and writers who are saying that they refuse to visit forums for the same reasons I am stating."

Bruce, that is way too cool.... I am impressed and as you know I have enjoyed your posts for many years. I had no idea that you were a scout, and or a writer for the N.F.L.

Who do you write and or scout for if you do not mind? Or if you want to go sub-rosa or clandestine on this I can understand... I would love you to tell me so I can read your work or follow your souting activity if you will P.M. me it would be appreciated... I think you know enough about me that I am not the type of person to throw you under the bus.

Anyhow..... On to this tread and your comments.

I am pleased to disagree with you.

There should not be be a singled out Sherman bashing thread.

Bruce, You know this team is owned by the community, and I feel the fan's in Green Bay have a far more valid reason to be unambiguous in all of their praise or how they condem all aspects of the team than any other fan in the NFL has the right to. I think "The Coaching" is a big part of that team.

However, any good forum (Which this one is.) is about both sides of the fence. Bruce, that means both sides.

Otherwise Ryan should re-name this PACKERFANCLUB.COM

I log on here to Packer Talk--- to get both sides, with out smack, and it is a great site. I am getting that right now, and it is the best Packer Forum in the world wide net.

Bruce, I know you know that Eugene McCarthy wrote: "Being in Politics is like being a football coach, you have to be smart enough to understand the game, and dumb enough to think it is important.

I am not getting political here. But what if you go back and read your original post and change the name Sherman to a countries leader, and then changed the name fan to the people of that country.

Pick a country. It becomes censorship.

Mike Sherman is a good man. Mike Sherman has a family. Mike Sherman is a good person. Mike Sherman is a good coach. But Mike Sherman is not a good coach for the Packers.... Perhaps he is best suited as an assistant coach, I have no idea, you may... You are a writer or scout, but I do know this.......

I come here to this forum becuase it is a FOURM.

All of the people who log in here and I enjoy all of them, are speaking their mind about the Packers, Sherman, the players who suck, the players who are good... The whole scope. this makes it a Fourm and an intersting read to me, a fan of forum's.

That includes bashing Sherman and that includes my friend P@ck66, and you Bruce as long is everyone else.

P@ck66 is funny and can be wise abouit football as well. You are wisew and can be funny as well... T.O. Pack fan comes in and makes my day. AZ Packfan makes me think Carol, makes a post... Tromdaz is a good writer. DePack gives me insight. Ryan keeps control of the whole picture.

I love a forum without vulger... this is that forum. I never log on to a Packer or Raider Fan Club.


RP

 

[sixone220]

RP you make some good pts but so does Bruce. we all have our own opinions on what is going wrong and what has gone on in the past.

you can blame coaching. the next guy can blame injuries. i could blame the schedule makers. someone else could blame the NFL for not giving up compensatory picks. that being said, everyone has that right to come here and say what they think, but at the same time, less is more.

last season there wasn't a day that went by during the season that i didn't come in here and at least read up on some posts. like bruce mentioned, i don't stop in like i used to because of the sherman hating. it's fine if you don't like him, say so. i don't agree with a lot of things that he's done and if they hire a new coach, so be it, but i don't need to read how much sherman sucks in every post. i think that it IS a good idea to let a select few rant in a stickied sherman post. it's no different than the reggie thread. many people wanna talk about the chances of getting him, myself included, but every thread does have to be steering to that topic.

Topic: Pack will beat Chicago.
My Response: I hope they don't, so we can still draft reggie.

Topic: Gado wins rookie of the month.
My Response: I wish that he wouldn't have so maybe we would have lost to Atlanta so that we could be in a better position to draft reggie.

Topic: Javon's rehab going well.
My Response: I'm just glad that he got hurt in the first place, so maybe we can draft reggie.

That all sounds pretty stupid right? that's exactly how i feel when every thread not matter the topic seems to get reverted back to how we need to fire sherossley cuz we're 2-9 due to the coaching. don't you guys get that it gets really tiresome whether you love or hate sherman?

and please, enough with the censorship stuff. this is an internet forum. ryan is the judge, the jury and the executioner. you have the freedom to say whatever you want but you don't have freedom of the consequences.

I can say ryan is a wuss because he plays madden on pro so he can go undefeated...lol. but i also have to deal with it, if he bans me for it.

you can say sherman sucks all you want, but by repeatedly doing so in every post, you drive away some very knowledgeable posters who would otherwise have a lot to add to this forum.

 

[Bruce]

What an interesting leap you make Raider...

Raider Pride:

You make quite a few leaps here. At NO time did I ever come close to supporting or advocating censorship. What I said is endless rants that say the same thing over and over bury football discussion are tiresome and will drive away most real football discussion. I certainly support 66's and any other persons right to be critical of coaching, however does it need to high jack and/or bury every other thread. I have been critical of coaching -- but try to make my comments relevant and timely. How many times do we need to read the following before we figure out that Pack66 thinks Sherman sucks?:

Plain and simple...they should take him out to woodshed and be done with him...He lost this game--Sherman! He is a piece of sh*t....i can't stand to look at him...with that stupid flat-top and that dumb, ugly stupid (replaced word) kitty on his face...

And i know some of you Sherman *** kissers out there are gonna say...but there were so many injuries...Longwell missed that field goal..blah..blah...it was the defense...I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT!

WHY THE HELL DID THEY TRY TO SNAP THE BALL TO FISHER INSTEAD OF FAVRE?..I AM TIRED OF THEIR b.s. TRICK PLAYS THAT NEVER WORK....SHERROSSLEY IS NOTHING BUT A BIG PU$$Y....GET HIM THE F*** OUT OF THERE...HE SUCKS..HE HAS ALWAYS SUCKED...

RUNNING A DRAW ON 3RD AND 3....! THIS IS WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT! THE GUY IS A FRIGGIN' MORON AND THERE IS NO DEFENDING HIM...

When Ryan created the Reggie Bush thread, was that censorship? R.P. you are an intelligent guy, where did anyone say that there should only be one side. Further, what side would you put me on?

It is an interesting paradox you present here. For me to say that endless rants drive good posters away -- some of whom are very connected to the game -- that is simply stating a fact. I proposed nothing, rather expressed my opinion about not liking to have to wade through so much crap and talked of knowing scouts and writers that retreat to a closed forum out of frustration. Good football discussion suffers. I have access, I can go and read their stuff and have dialogue but feel that we all lose in that process. Another poster than suggested the dedicated forum to Sherman discussion to free up room for other football discussions. For this you accuse me of censorship -- what a joke. It is you who is now trying to stifle my right to expression, based on a whole lot of assuming and attributing.

You are a good man R.P., but I think you might apply the same standard you are proposing to yourself. Obi1 proposed an idea and you condescendingly dismiss his suggestion as wrong and un-American, and than in some mysterious leap attribute his idea to me and tell me what I am doing.

Bruce,

You typed in the above post.. "I like Chamuko and do not mean to single him out, but I know other scouts and writers who are saying that they refuse to visit forums for the same reasons I am stating."

Bruce, that is way too cool.... I am impressed and as you know I have enjoyed your posts for many years. I had no idea that you were a scout, and or a writer for the N.F.L.

Who do you write and or scout for if you do not mind? Or if you want to go sub-rosa or clandestine on this I can understand... I would love you to tell me so I can read your work or follow your souting activity if you will P.M. me it would be appreciated... I think you know enough about me that I am not the type of person to throw you under the bus.

Anyhow..... On to this tread and your comments.

I am pleased to disagree with you.

There should not be be a singled out Sherman bashing thread.

Bruce, You know this team is owned by the community, and I feel the fan's in Green Bay have a far more valid reason to be unambiguous in all of their praise or how they condem all aspects of the team than any other fan in the NFL has the right to. I think "The Coaching" is a big part of that team.

However, any good forum (Which this one is.) is about both sides of the fence. Bruce, that means both sides.

Otherwise Ryan should re-name this PACKERFANCLUB.COM

I log on here to Packer Talk--- to get both sides, with out smack, and it is a great site. I am getting that right now, and it is the best Packer Forum in the world wide net.

Bruce, I know you know that Eugene McCarthy wrote: "Being in Politics is like being a football coach, you have to be smart enough to understand the game, and dumb enough to think it is important.

I am not getting political here. But what if you go back and read your original post and change the name Sherman to a countries leader, and then changed the name fan to the people of that country.

Pick a country. It becomes censorship.

Mike Sherman is a good man. Mike Sherman has a family. Mike Sherman is a good person. Mike Sherman is a good coach. But Mike Sherman is not a good coach for the Packers.... Perhaps he is best suited as an assistant coach, I have no idea, you may... You are a writer or scout, but I do know this.......

I come here to this forum becuase it is a FOURM.

All of the people who log in here and I enjoy all of them, are speaking their mind about the Packers, Sherman, the players who suck, the players who are good... The whole scope. this makes it a Fourm and an intersting read to me, a fan of forum's.

That includes bashing Sherman and that includes my friend P@ck66, and you Bruce as long is everyone else.

P@ck66 is funny and can be wise abouit football as well. You are wisew and can be funny as well... T.O. Pack fan comes in and makes my day. AZ Packfan makes me think Carol, makes a post... Tromdaz is a good writer. DePack gives me insight. Ryan keeps control of the whole picture.

I love a forum without vulger... this is that forum. I never log on to a Packer or Raider Fan Club.


RP

 

[P@ck66]

ps..

(i secretly love Mike Sherman as head coach of the GB Packers.!!)

-Go Pack Go...

 

[NDPackerFan]

If making an official "Reggie Bush Thread" is the right thing to do, it should work the same for an anti-Mike Sherman thread. Obviously, Ryan doesn't want Reggie Bush brought into different topics and, after thinking about it for a while, I think he's right. I just can't understand why it wouldn't work the same for those that want to bash Mike Sherman with every post.

 

[Raider Pride]

Bruce,

First of all.

I am sorry you felt that I was twisting your thoughts. That is one way of looking at it.

I was not, I was simply making a point which included OB1's comments on the subject of Sherman Bashing. I was making the point this is a Forum and not a Fan Club.

Secondly.

I agree with all who say threads should not be hi-jacked. However, on the other hand, the only way that they can be hi-jacked is if a comment posted in a thread inveigles more responses than the original posted thought by people who are reading the thread.

It would be kind of like listening to Dan Patrick taking calls on USC Football's offense, and a Notre Dame fan calls in and complains about how the Irish were robbed at the end of the game this year and the USC offence is over rated. All of a sudden every one calls in to retort and all of a sudden it becomes a discussion on the USC Notre Dame game.

Is not each thread not a discussion? Do dicussions not always eventually flow to ward the most appealing and heart felt issues.

In this tough year for all of us, and the Caoching is a major heart felt issue.

I have never bashed Sherman the way some people have. I think he is a good coach in the wrong situation. I think if he was given a career adjustment by the Packers Al Davis would grab him faster than you can say Art Shell and I would be happy about it.

Thirdly.

You all are right and I was wrong. I did not realize the fact OB1 was talking about a seperate thread in the same forum. That makes sense to me. After all it is in the same forum.

I thought he was advocating a seperate FORUM... Like the Trash Talk Forum, where one would have to log of Packer Talk and log onto the bashing Sherman forum.

This was my mistake.

A seperate thread in the same forum is a good idea becuase it is a major issue.

RP

 

[Greg C.]

Bruce: I, too, get sick of all the anti-Sherman stuff because it is so repetitive and hateful. I often get the feeling that were it not for Sherman, some of these posters would be repetitive and hateful about something else anyway.

Where I may disagree with you, though, is your implication that people who want the coach fired should wait until the end of the season to complain. Because most coaches' fates are decided, one way or another, within a few days of the end of the season, this would leave a very small window of opportunity to express one's views. The status of the coach is fair game at any time of year. But it is always better to be concise than to repeat the same things over and over and over.

RP: I am very impressed with your use of the word "inveigles." I had to look that one up!

 

[sixone220]

Thread hijacking is the act of taking a forum discussion thread wildly off topic by discussing a subject entirely unrelated to the subject at hand.

While this can be an intentional act of trolling, it is often accidental - caused by other participants in the discussion responding to a throwaway remark, taking the thread off at a tangent to the original subject matter. The results, whilst often humourous, often extract a feeling of resentment from the author of the post.


RP- I think that the mere act of attempting to change the topic of the original thread is hijacking. it doesn't matter if the majority of the people start in on the changed topic or not. And the DP show would never be hijacked when the producer chooses who gets on the air to talk about what.

 

[Raider Pride]

Every one here has great points.

I think the key to not getting stressed out here is to simply take the best and leave the rest. Personally if I can get one thought out of any post that makes me think then it is a good thing.


Greg. My bad, words like that belong in a board room with people who feel "the need" to hear words like "inveigle", perhaps not on a football forum.

My friend and mentor, Mr. Zig Zigler a great motivational speaker from Yazoo City Mississippi who changed my life said: "I tend to speak at the 7th grade 7th month level.... That way even the college professors will understand what I am saying saying."


sixone220. Perhaps I am wrong, I often am but do you think the producer of the DP show would not realize the phone board is lighting up and go with the flow? I think producers of talk radio sit up all night thinking of what would make people keep listening and hit topics that light up the board?

RP