[DEBATE] Staff

[pyledriver80]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

Dude no where did i say MS is why we lost this game Im just saying i find it humorous how people have called MS a good coach and gm. If he would have done a better job drafting on the 1st day picks are team would be better then they are now.

It's Teds team now, one of theses days you will get it. It's not hard, really.


For as bad as MS's guys were they made the playoffs. Sure guys like Brett,DD,Henderson were not MS's guys but when MS added guys like Fisher,Chatman,Carrol,Barnett,Walker,etc we won games.


TT gets rid of those guys and BAM we go 4-12 with Ted's replacements.

Wolf's guys + Shermans guys = playoffs
Wolf's guys + Thompsons guys = 4-12


If you think Sherman made bad picks than it seems fair to say that Thompson made WORSE picks.

What is the difference between the 10-6 2004 team and the 4-12 Thompson team?

 

[Yared-Yam]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

I don't like MS as a GM but I think he was a respectable coach, who probably shouldn't have been fired

I agree with that. Bates would probably still be here too

 

[porky88]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

2000 1 14 Bubba Franks - Average at best anymore
2000 2 44 Chad Clifton - good
2000 3 74 Steve Warren - waste
2000 4 98 Na'il Diggs - ok
2000 4 114 Anthony Lucas - waste
2000 4 126 Gary Berry - waste
2000 5 149 Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila - good
2000 5 151 Joey Jamison - waste
2000 7 224 Mark Tauscher -good
2000 7 229 Ron Moore -waste
2000 7 242 Charles Lee - did ok
2000 7 249 Eugene McCaslin -waste
2000 7 252 Rondell Mealey -waste

2001 1 10 Jamal Reynolds - waste
2001 2 41 Robert Ferguson -waste
2001 3 71 Bhawoh Jue -waste
2001 3 72 Torrance Marshall -waste
2001 4 105 Bill Ferrario -waste
2001 6 198 David Martin -waste overall an awful draft

Ron Wolf was the GM for these 2 Drafts. Sherman wasn't even on the staff in the 2000 staff.

The story goes Sherman really pushed Wolf for Reynolds and Ferguson. I dunno the extent and I really don't care much at this point. It's done now. I look at the drafts he was GM of and I see 1/3 of the players he drafted in the NFL and that's just not very good.

 

[Yared-Yam]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

The story goes Sherman really pushed Wolf for Reynolds and Ferguson. I dunno the extent and I really don't care much at this point. It's done now. I look at the drafts he was GM of and I see 1/3 of the players he drafted in the NFL and that's just not very good.

That's the story. When asked about Fergie Wolf said he blew it not taking Chris Chambers

But that may be hindsight talking

 

[Chamuko]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

How about - Carroll,Collins,Woodson,Poppinga,Hawk,Barnett,Kampman,KGB,Pickett,
Morency,Brett,Miree,Colledge,Moll, Tauscher,Spitz, Wells,Franks,Robinson,Driver,Ferguson,etc?

And MM, Sanders and Schitenheimer...

 

[pyledriver80]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

Agreed, I still have yet to get response to this question



Wolf's guys + Shermans guys = playoffs
Wolf's guys + Thompsons guys = 4-12


If you think Sherman made bad picks than it seems fair to say that Thompson made WORSE picks.

What is the difference between the 10-6 2004 team and the 4-12 Thompson team?

 

[porky88]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

Dude no where did i say MS is why we lost this game Im just saying i find it humorous how people have called MS a good coach and gm. If he would have done a better job drafting on the 1st day picks are team would be better then they are now.

It's Teds team now, one of theses days you will get it. It's not hard, really.


For as bad as MS's guys were they made the playoffs. Sure guys like Brett,DD,Henderson were not MS's guys but when MS added guys like Fisher,Chatman,Carrol,Barnett,Walker,etc we won games.


TT gets rid of those guys and BAM we go 4-12 with Ted's replacements.

Wolf's guys + Shermans guys = playoffs
Wolf's guys + Thompsons guys = 4-12


If you think Sherman made bad picks than it seems fair to say that Thompson made WORSE picks.

What is the difference between the 10-6 2004 team and the 4-12 Thompson team?

First let's drop Ted Thompson from this thread. If you want to debate that let's do it in the proper thread.

Let's look at Mike Sherman as a GM.

The Drafts above were not good. The one good draft showed Sherman wasn't either the GM or Coach of this team. He was the coordinator in Seattle.

1/3 of the guys Sherman drafted are still in the NFL. That's 33.3% and that's an awful percentage.

As for free agency. Sherman wasn't exactly lights out there. Navies and Roman are the only signings that really did anything for us.

Joe Johnson was going to be the signing that put us over the hump and got us to the Super Bowl. It was a big bust.

Hardy Nickerson wasn't exactly a great signing either as he was let go in 1 year.

Hannibal Navies, Mark Roman, Grady Jackson and Wesley Walls were the only guys he signed that really came in and did anything.

Perhaps I’m overlooking some one?

In trades he was 1 for 3 with the big one's. Glenn was traded for. He had a decent year and was a decent target for Favre.

but was traded after one year in favor of Ferguson and Walker.

Harris was a nice pickup even for a 2nd rounder. He's given us a lot of solid seasons as well.

Ron Wolf built a team that was going to be good years after he was gone. That's what made him a great GM. He built that entire offense from the offensive line to Favre to the receivers to trading for Ahman Green his final year here. He also was responsible for a lot of the good defensive players in the Sherman era. McKenzie, KGB, and Sharper being the big one's.

By no means was Wolf perfect as shown his last draft was awful but he could be in the HOF and he certainly built a team through drafts and free agent signings that was good years after he left.

Sherman's job as GM has finally caught up with the Packers. That is why Bob Harlan hired a new GM. Again though from the looks of things this off season was not as good as previous thought. Green Bay could be set back because of 2 bad GM's because of this but one of those GM’s will be Mike Sherman. I certainly don’t have to tell you who the other would be.

 

[pyledriver80]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

Blah,Blah,Blah - With all those terrible moves we were a playoff team. How come we are no longer? That was my original question.

 

[porky88]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

Blah,Blah,Blah - With all those terrible moves we were a playoff team. How come we are no longer? That was my original question.

No valid points to back your statement about Mike Sherman the GM.

I think it's a mixture of a lot of things to why this team is doing bad.

Mike Sherman's job as GM is where it starts. He was no qualified to be a GM and he just wasn't any good. To lose all those draft picks over the course of 4 years is just awful for any team. Like stated his free agency was just awful as well. Like I said his failure as a GM (not a Coach) has finally caught up with us.

Ted Thompson's ability to fix what Sherman has caused is the other problem right now. So far he hasn't fix the mess of Sherman but Thompson's plan was to bring in a youth movement and build for the future and not now. Once people accept that they won't be as down on Sunday's because of now.

Coaching has been suspect. So far I've seen improvement on offense in some areas. Defense has been the same old thing. It's as if Bates was never here.

Inexperience. This relates to TT's decision to build for the future and not win a SB now. Just because you don't agree with the decision to build for the future doesn't mean it's a bad move.

Ted Thompson was hired and he wants to rebuild. When you rebuild your going to go through growing pains and on going struggle. All teams do.

I've stated me feelings about TT. 3 years is what he's got. If we don't improve by next year then sign me up for firetedthompson.com..

If he does though my feeling will still remain the same. That Ron Wolf should be in the HOF soon and he was the last successful GM of the Packers.

Right now though I'm waiting and giving TT a chance to build this team the way he wants to and that's through the Draft.

 

[Gopackgo82]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

It's pretty obvious that some people (the people that should read it) are ignoring this in my thread, so I'll post it here.

Mike Vandermause column: Give Packers time to rebuild

By Mike Vandermause

How did it come to this? The Green Bay Packers are 11½-point underdogs heading into tonight's game against the Philadelphia Eagles.

You'd have to go back almost 17 years to find the last time they were expected to lose by such a large point spread.

In sifting through reasons why the Packers have fallen so far in the eyes of the experts, it would be easy to look at short-term problems.

We've heard a litany of theories this season, from the inexperience of coach Mike McCarthy, to the free-agent miscalculations of General Manager Ted Thompson, to the inability of assistants to properly teach their players, to the decline of aging veterans, to the rookie mistakes.

When the losses mount, fingers are pointed in every direction and few are immune from criticism. Fair or not, almost everyone gets caught in the crossfire.

The blame game will intensify with every defeat this season.

That's why it would be instructive to step back and look at the big picture.

There's no quick fix for the Packers' predicament. Thompson has undertaken a massive rebuilding job, and it likely will take years to turn things around.

It's too early to know whether Thompson is the man for the job, but he needs time to prove himself.

One number — zero — tells us all we need to know about the situation in Green Bay. That's how many Pro Bowl players are on the roster among the 50 Packers draft picks since 2001.

Zip.

Nada.

Zilch.

In fairness, it's too soon to judge the 2005 and 2006 drafts, which in the short term have produced six starters. It also should be noted the Packers traded their only home-grown Pro Bowl draft pick in the last six years — receiver Javon Walker — and the jury is still out on that transaction.

But if you're looking for the main reason the Packers are struggling, go back to the drafts from 2001 to 2004. With minimal talent coming in during that time period, the Packers were bound to suffer the consequences.

Not only are there no Pro Bowlers in the bunch, there are just four starters from those four drafts — Aaron Kampman, Nick Barnett, Scott Wells and Corey Williams. That's being generous, becuse Williams only recently became a starter, due in part to an injury to another player.

By comparison, the Eagles drafted a modest total of seven starters from 2001 to 2004, but three have become Pro Bowl players — cornerback Lito Sheppard, safety Michael Lewis and running back Brian Westbrook.

It's important to use the draft to not only build a solid base of starters, but also to produce some Pro Bowl-caliber players who can make a difference. The Packers accomplished neither over a four-year span, and the bill has come due.

The effects of a bad draft are generally seen two to three years down the road.

The same can be said for a good draft, and that's why Thompson deserves time and patience in his attempts to turn around the Packers' fortunes.

Do you get it now pyle? Didn't think so. :roll:

 

[pyledriver80]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

It's pretty obvious that some people (the people that should read it) are ignoring this in my thread, so I'll post it here.

Mike Vandermause column: Give Packers time to rebuild

By Mike Vandermause

How did it come to this? The Green Bay Packers are 11½-point underdogs heading into tonight's game against the Philadelphia Eagles.

You'd have to go back almost 17 years to find the last time they were expected to lose by such a large point spread.

In sifting through reasons why the Packers have fallen so far in the eyes of the experts, it would be easy to look at short-term problems.

We've heard a litany of theories this season, from the inexperience of coach Mike McCarthy, to the free-agent miscalculations of General Manager Ted Thompson, to the inability of assistants to properly teach their players, to the decline of aging veterans, to the rookie mistakes.

When the losses mount, fingers are pointed in every direction and few are immune from criticism. Fair or not, almost everyone gets caught in the crossfire.

The blame game will intensify with every defeat this season.

That's why it would be instructive to step back and look at the big picture.

There's no quick fix for the Packers' predicament. Thompson has undertaken a massive rebuilding job, and it likely will take years to turn things around.

It's too early to know whether Thompson is the man for the job, but he needs time to prove himself.

One number — zero — tells us all we need to know about the situation in Green Bay. That's how many Pro Bowl players are on the roster among the 50 Packers draft picks since 2001.

Zip.

Nada.

Zilch.

In fairness, it's too soon to judge the 2005 and 2006 drafts, which in the short term have produced six starters. It also should be noted the Packers traded their only home-grown Pro Bowl draft pick in the last six years — receiver Javon Walker — and the jury is still out on that transaction.

But if you're looking for the main reason the Packers are struggling, go back to the drafts from 2001 to 2004. With minimal talent coming in during that time period, the Packers were bound to suffer the consequences.

Not only are there no Pro Bowlers in the bunch, there are just four starters from those four drafts — Aaron Kampman, Nick Barnett, Scott Wells and Corey Williams. That's being generous, becuse Williams only recently became a starter, due in part to an injury to another player.

By comparison, the Eagles drafted a modest total of seven starters from 2001 to 2004, but three have become Pro Bowl players — cornerback Lito Sheppard, safety Michael Lewis and running back Brian Westbrook.

It's important to use the draft to not only build a solid base of starters, but also to produce some Pro Bowl-caliber players who can make a difference. The Packers accomplished neither over a four-year span, and the bill has come due.

The effects of a bad draft are generally seen two to three years down the road.

The same can be said for a good draft, and that's why Thompson deserves time and patience in his attempts to turn around the Packers' fortunes.

Do you get it now pyle? Didn't think so. :roll:

Well friend if someone would answer the original question I posted we could debate it but it's getting DODGED left and right........go figure!

 

[Gopackgo82]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

Well friend if someone would answer the original question I posted we could debate it but it's getting DODGED left and right........go figure!

Kind of like how you don't even acknowledge the fact that Sherman's drafts have destroyed this team and hide behind your little statement that they made the playoffs, so he must have done something right?

Drafts take about 3 years to make their impact. Sherman inherited a great team and was able to take that great team to the playoffs while simultaneously depleting the talent with crappy draft after crappy draft after crappy draft. Sherman's drafts are making their impact now. Read the article again. If you still don't understand this very simple concept, then uhhh.... well I don't know what to do. At least try to understand the arguement is all I can say.

 

[all about da packers]

Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/etc.)

Alright, the offical thread to debate your views and opinions on TT/MM/etc.

Per majikman:

According to TT and MM, the Packers are not rebuilding.

If that is not the case, then do you think it was wise to....

1. Fire MS and hire MM..
2. Let Bates go and promote Sanders...
3. Let MM hire Kurt Shottenheimer...
4. Let Javon Walker go...
5. Start two rookies on the Offensive Line...
6. Bring in a completely new blocking scheme..
7. Try to re-build the defense, offensive line, WR corps, and RB's all at the same time...
8. Let Grady go..
9. Let Ahmad Carroll go..
10. Encourage Brett Favre to return...?

Hindsight being 20/20....I'm interested in seeing what people think about these things here..

 

[porky88]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

It's pretty obvious that some people (the people that should read it) are ignoring this in my thread, so I'll post it here.

Mike Vandermause column: Give Packers time to rebuild

By Mike Vandermause

How did it come to this? The Green Bay Packers are 11½-point underdogs heading into tonight's game against the Philadelphia Eagles.

You'd have to go back almost 17 years to find the last time they were expected to lose by such a large point spread.

In sifting through reasons why the Packers have fallen so far in the eyes of the experts, it would be easy to look at short-term problems.

We've heard a litany of theories this season, from the inexperience of coach Mike McCarthy, to the free-agent miscalculations of General Manager Ted Thompson, to the inability of assistants to properly teach their players, to the decline of aging veterans, to the rookie mistakes.

When the losses mount, fingers are pointed in every direction and few are immune from criticism. Fair or not, almost everyone gets caught in the crossfire.

The blame game will intensify with every defeat this season.

That's why it would be instructive to step back and look at the big picture.

There's no quick fix for the Packers' predicament. Thompson has undertaken a massive rebuilding job, and it likely will take years to turn things around.

It's too early to know whether Thompson is the man for the job, but he needs time to prove himself.

One number — zero — tells us all we need to know about the situation in Green Bay. That's how many Pro Bowl players are on the roster among the 50 Packers draft picks since 2001.

Zip.

Nada.

Zilch.

In fairness, it's too soon to judge the 2005 and 2006 drafts, which in the short term have produced six starters. It also should be noted the Packers traded their only home-grown Pro Bowl draft pick in the last six years — receiver Javon Walker — and the jury is still out on that transaction.

But if you're looking for the main reason the Packers are struggling, go back to the drafts from 2001 to 2004. With minimal talent coming in during that time period, the Packers were bound to suffer the consequences.

Not only are there no Pro Bowlers in the bunch, there are just four starters from those four drafts — Aaron Kampman, Nick Barnett, Scott Wells and Corey Williams. That's being generous, becuse Williams only recently became a starter, due in part to an injury to another player.

By comparison, the Eagles drafted a modest total of seven starters from 2001 to 2004, but three have become Pro Bowl players — cornerback Lito Sheppard, safety Michael Lewis and running back Brian Westbrook.

It's important to use the draft to not only build a solid base of starters, but also to produce some Pro Bowl-caliber players who can make a difference. The Packers accomplished neither over a four-year span, and the bill has come due.

The effects of a bad draft are generally seen two to three years down the road.

The same can be said for a good draft, and that's why Thompson deserves time and patience in his attempts to turn around the Packers' fortunes.

Do you get it now pyle? Didn't think so. :roll:

Well friend if someone would answer the original question I posted we could debate it but it's getting DODGED left and right........go figure!

Your orginal question is why the team is bad and struggling.

I gave you 3 reasons to why I believe this. It's not that nobody is answering your question it's that your not hearing the answer you want.

 

[all about da packers]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

Alright guys, you gotta settle down, a difference of opinion is always welcome on this site so no need to get riled up.

This thread is going to have TT brought up, it is inevitable, so I'll merge it with the existing thread for TT but I'll leave a shadow topic in the forums.

*MERGED*

 

[TOPackerFan]

Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/etc.)

Hang on there Porky. We did draft a Pro Bowler during the time period you mentioned, he was just traded away by TT.

 

[pyledriver80]

Re: Looking Back On MS Drafts.

It's pretty obvious that some people (the people that should read it) are ignoring this in my thread, so I'll post it here.

Mike Vandermause column: Give Packers time to rebuild

By Mike Vandermause

How did it come to this? The Green Bay Packers are 11½-point underdogs heading into tonight's game against the Philadelphia Eagles.

You'd have to go back almost 17 years to find the last time they were expected to lose by such a large point spread.

In sifting through reasons why the Packers have fallen so far in the eyes of the experts, it would be easy to look at short-term problems.

We've heard a litany of theories this season, from the inexperience of coach Mike McCarthy, to the free-agent miscalculations of General Manager Ted Thompson, to the inability of assistants to properly teach their players, to the decline of aging veterans, to the rookie mistakes.

When the losses mount, fingers are pointed in every direction and few are immune from criticism. Fair or not, almost everyone gets caught in the crossfire.

The blame game will intensify with every defeat this season.

That's why it would be instructive to step back and look at the big picture.

There's no quick fix for the Packers' predicament. Thompson has undertaken a massive rebuilding job, and it likely will take years to turn things around.

It's too early to know whether Thompson is the man for the job, but he needs time to prove himself.

One number — zero — tells us all we need to know about the situation in Green Bay. That's how many Pro Bowl players are on the roster among the 50 Packers draft picks since 2001.

Zip.

Nada.

Zilch.

In fairness, it's too soon to judge the 2005 and 2006 drafts, which in the short term have produced six starters. It also should be noted the Packers traded their only home-grown Pro Bowl draft pick in the last six years — receiver Javon Walker — and the jury is still out on that transaction.

But if you're looking for the main reason the Packers are struggling, go back to the drafts from 2001 to 2004. With minimal talent coming in during that time period, the Packers were bound to suffer the consequences.

Not only are there no Pro Bowlers in the bunch, there are just four starters from those four drafts — Aaron Kampman, Nick Barnett, Scott Wells and Corey Williams. That's being generous, becuse Williams only recently became a starter, due in part to an injury to another player.

By comparison, the Eagles drafted a modest total of seven starters from 2001 to 2004, but three have become Pro Bowl players — cornerback Lito Sheppard, safety Michael Lewis and running back Brian Westbrook.

It's important to use the draft to not only build a solid base of starters, but also to produce some Pro Bowl-caliber players who can make a difference. The Packers accomplished neither over a four-year span, and the bill has come due.

The effects of a bad draft are generally seen two to three years down the road.

The same can be said for a good draft, and that's why Thompson deserves time and patience in his attempts to turn around the Packers' fortunes.

Do you get it now pyle? Didn't think so. :roll:

Well friend if someone would answer the original question I posted we could debate it but it's getting DODGED left and right........go figure!

Your orginal question is why the team is bad and struggling.

I gave you 3 reasons to why I believe this. It's not that nobody is answering your question it's that your not hearing the answer you want.

No Porky that WAS NOT my question.

The Question was -- What is the difference between the 04 playoff team Packers and the 06 Packers?

Thats all I want to know. Not about Sherman's weak schedule played or Shermans draft history.


04 Packers vs 06 Packers - Where are we different?

 

[porky88]

Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/etc.)

This team is inexperience right now. This team just isn't as good. I don't know where anyone would say this team is as good as a playoff team. It'll be very lucky to see 500 season.

Ultimately it's the blame game that it eventually comes down to and there are numerous things and numerous of people to blame the current state of the Packers on if you want to that way. It comes down to whether people running things can fix what was caused by previous failures and their very own. So far I agree not so good but Rome wasn't built in a Day so I'm willing to play the wait and see. Like I've said and you know my stance. If it's not better at this time next year then I think president Jones should clean house.

 

[pyledriver80]

Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/etc.)

But why is it so young? We were not exactly an Old team in 2004.

I'm talking personel wise

Walker
Wahle
Rivera
Chatman
Fisher
Roman
Carroll
Lenon
Sharper
Hawthorne
Thomas
Navies
Peterson
Jackson
Diggs
Davenport
Leach
Longwell



Now you lose all these guys who won the division title and replace them with

Woodson
Hawk
Poppinga
Underwood
Manual
Pickett
Robinson
Jennings
Moll
Coston
Colledge
Spitz
Lee
Morency
Herron
Miree
Hodge
Bush
Collins
Rayner



And then we get what we have got now.


All I hear is about how bad Shermans guys were. If Shermans 2004 roster was so bad this logically means that this 2006 roster is hideous.

Wolf's drafts have little effect on this. Most of Wolfs guys that were on the roster with Sherman are either still here or TT did not resign them. Thats Ted's fault.


I know you are going to say "we are young" but "we were young" with that 2004 roster. We are YOUNG because Ted wants it like that and wants to get rid of all the experience in favor of younger guys.


Walker was YOUNG - Ted traded him
Fisher was YOUNG - Ted let him walk
Carroll was YOUNG - Ted cut him
Leach was YOUNG - Ted released him
Thomas was YOUNG - Ted released him
Chatman was YOUNG - Ted let him go


So Ted Thompson's YOUNG guys can improve but if Ted didn't draft you then you just are what you are?


What did these guys get 2-3 years? In 2-3 years if Poppinga,Collins, Underwood, Moll, Colledge, etc don't improve are we going to cut em and start over?

 

[porky88]

Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/e

But why is it so young? We were not exactly an Old team in 2004.

I'm talking personel wise

Walker
Wahle
Rivera
Chatman
Fisher
Roman
Carroll
Lenon
Sharper
Hawthorne
Thomas
Navies
Peterson
Jackson
Diggs
Davenport
Leach
Longwell



Now you lose all these guys who won the division title and replace them with

Look at the list you made. Majority of those guys were on a 4-12 team a year ago. Majority of those guys didn't help the Packers out last year after this team was 4-12. The good players from the Sherman era weren't even brought in by Mike Sherman. They were brought in by Ron Wolf.

Chad Clifton, Mark Tauscher, Mike Flanagan, Mike Wahle, Marco Rivera, Ahman Green, Donald Driver, William Henderson, Bubba Franks, Brett Favre.

That's 10 of the 11 starters on those playoff teams brought in by Ron Wolf.

Look at those players for a sec.

Clifton and Tauscher had 0 Pro Bowls but were very solid starters and could of gone to some Pro Bowl's in their career.

Outside of those 2 everyone else on that list has gone to a Pro Bowl before. That's the offense that Ron Wolf built. Brett Favre, Ahman Green, William Henderson, Donald Driver, Bubba Franks, Marco Rivera, and Mike Wahle have all gone to Pro Bowl's. Mike Sherman didn't bring them in. He was their Head Coach. Ron Wolf brought them in though the draft and trade. Sherman inherited those players while they were in their prime.

You can even add the good players we had on defense to that list. KGB drafted by Ron Wolf. Darren Sharper drafted by Ron Wolf. Both went to the Pro Bowl. Sherman was their coach but he wasn't responsible for bringing them in. Mike McKenzie never went to the Pro Bowl but he was very solid here and he was drafted by none other than Ron Wolf.

All I hear is about how bad Shermans guys were. If Shermans 2004 roster was so bad this logically means that this 2006 roster is hideous.

Those weren't Sherman guys. Those were Ron Wolf's guys. Sherman was their Head Coach. Not the GM that brought hem in.

Wolf's drafts have little effect on this. Most of Wolfs guys that were on the roster with Sherman are either still here or TT did not resign them. Thats Ted's fault.

All I did was name numerous players that were brought in by Ron Wolf that played a HUGE factor in this teams success. Sherman gave us one Pro Bowler since he was here as a GM and that was Javon Walker. The rest were all Ron Wolf's guys. 10 of the 11 starters on our very good offense were brought in by Ron Wolf. Outside of Favre and Green they were all done through the NFL Draft by Ron Wolf.

I know you are going to say "we are young" but "we were young" with that 2004 roster. We are YOUNG because Ted wants it like that and wants to get rid of all the experience in favor of younger guys.

I'm not saying we're young. We are but I'm not going to say that. I don't have to. The play shows on the field. TT is rebuilding this team. It'll take more than 2 years. It needs to show improvement though and if it doesn't by next year then he needs to go.

Walker was YOUNG - Ted traded him
Fisher was YOUNG - Ted let him walk
Carroll was YOUNG - Ted cut him
Leach was YOUNG - Ted released him
Thomas was YOUNG - Ted released him
Chatman was YOUNG - Ted let him go

What's your definition of young? Chatman sure wasn't the reason we were 12-4 a few years ago. He was a decent player but certainly not that reason. Chatman was on last years team and played his biggest role on last years team that went 4-12. Carroll is young but time just ran out on him in GB. Out of all those guys only Javon Walker played a KEY role on this team going to the playoffs in 2004.

So Ted Thompson's YOUNG guys can improve but if Ted didn't draft you then you just are what you are?

What did these guys get 2-3 years? In 2-3 years if Poppinga,Collins, Underwood, Moll, Colledge, etc don't improve are we going to cut em and start over?

If those guys don't improve in 2 to 3 years in the league then we probably should have a new GM because that'll show the inability of Ted Thompson to evaluate talent.

 

[pyledriver80]

Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/etc.)

Again you go back to who Wolfs guys.......You keep focusing on this.


Those same Wolf Guys are on this team right now! Minus Flanny, Wahle and Rivera!

Why are they not here? Because Ted let them go. Flanny and Rivera are understandable. Wells is solid. So Rivera is the reason for the dropoff?


You say that Fisher,Chatman etc aren't the difference. Than who is? I am confused?

What is the difference between now and then? Obviously it's got to be something.

 

[porky88]

Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/e

Again you go back to who Wolfs guys.......You keep focusing on this.


Those same Wolf Guys are on this team right now! Minus Flanny, Wahle and Rivera!

Why are they not here? Because Ted let them go. Flanny and Rivera are understandable. Wells is solid. So Rivera is the reason for the dropoff?


You say that Fisher,Chatman etc aren't the difference. Than who is? I am confused?

What is the difference between now and then? Obviously it's got to be something.

Favre is at the end of his career. Green is well past his prime. As his Henderson and Franks. When players get to a certain point they tend to slow down. You can't play forever. A lot of these guys have past their peak. I thought this team should of won a Super Bowl few years ago when all the players I named were in their prime and at the top of their game. It's to late for that now as their talent is diminishing and this team has switched to rebuilding mode.

I’m not praising TT for the job he has done so far but I’m certainly not going to single him out when others are accountable as well.

 

[pyledriver80]

Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/e

Again you go back to who Wolfs guys.......You keep focusing on this.


Those same Wolf Guys are on this team right now! Minus Flanny, Wahle and Rivera!

Why are they not here? Because Ted let them go. Flanny and Rivera are understandable. Wells is solid. So Rivera is the reason for the dropoff?


You say that Fisher,Chatman etc aren't the difference. Than who is? I am confused?

What is the difference between now and then? Obviously it's got to be something.

Favre is at the end of his career. Green is well past his prime. As his Henderson and Franks. When players get to a certain point they tend to slow down. You can't play forever. A lot of these guys have past their peak. I thought this team should of won a Super Bowl few years ago when all the players I named were in their prime and at the top of their game. It's to late for that now as their talent is diminishing and this team has switched to rebuilding mode.

I’m not praising TT for the job he has done so far but I’m certainly not going to single him out when others are accountable as well.

Ok so this is the Difference. Favre,Green,Henderson and Franks are not playing at the level they did.

Perhaps Favre would be better if he was surrounded by more talent as he was in 2004. Perhaps Green would be more effective if we had a legit FB and legit O-Line. Henderson is old, I agree. Franks isn't old or slowing down however.


If you think this is the main difference between the teams, thats fine. Perhaps when they all go we will be competitive again.

 

[majikman]

Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/etc.)

Pyle said

Perhaps Favre would be better if he was surrounded by more talent as he was in 2004. Perhaps Green would be more effective if we had a legit FB and legit O-Line. Henderson is old, I agree. Franks isn't old or slowing down however.

Beautiful post Pyle.

I don't understand why people don't seem to get this about Favre. Look at Steve McNair on the Ravens. Don't tell me Favre couldn't be doing the same thing and more with the same or better talent.

 

[porky88]

Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/e

Again you go back to who Wolfs guys.......You keep focusing on this.


Those same Wolf Guys are on this team right now! Minus Flanny, Wahle and Rivera!

Why are they not here? Because Ted let them go. Flanny and Rivera are understandable. Wells is solid. So Rivera is the reason for the dropoff?


You say that Fisher,Chatman etc aren't the difference. Than who is? I am confused?

What is the difference between now and then? Obviously it's got to be something.

Favre is at the end of his career. Green is well past his prime. As his Henderson and Franks. When players get to a certain point they tend to slow down. You can't play forever. A lot of these guys have past their peak. I thought this team should of won a Super Bowl few years ago when all the players I named were in their prime and at the top of their game. It's to late for that now as their talent is diminishing and this team has switched to rebuilding mode.

I’m not praising TT for the job he has done so far but I’m certainly not going to single him out when others are accountable as well.

Ok so this is the Difference. Favre,Green,Henderson and Franks are not playing at the level they did.

Perhaps Favre would be better if he was surrounded by more talent as he was in 2004. Perhaps Green would be more effective if we had a legit FB and legit O-Line. Henderson is old, I agree. Franks isn't old or slowing down however.


If you think this is the main difference between the teams, thats fine. Perhaps when they all go we will be competitive again.

Out of them all only Favre I think could play at an elite level but even he needs a running game and I don't believe Green can no longer provide that. I think he'll have his games and I think he's important to the current team but he isn't the 1800 yard back he once was.

Again it's not that they need to go and right away we're good. I keep repeating myself but it's what I believe. Ted Thompson was brought in to clean a mess up. It's one thing to clean a mess but it can be even worse to just bring another one in. Whether TT has done just that remains to be seen in my opinion.