1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

[DEBATE] Staff

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Zero2Cool, Aug 31, 2006.

  1. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/etc.)

    Clean up the Division Championship 10-6 mess?
     
  2. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/e

    I consider that 10-6 Divsion Championship Ron Wolf's team and Mike Sherman as the Head Coach. Sherman as a GM mess is slowly fading away now anyways so it's all but gone.

    Pyle I'm not sure where you stand with Sherman but I know you want TT out now. If that's your opinion then so be it. I'll agree to disagree with you.

    If things don't get better promise me you'll save me a sign for firing ted thompson though. :twisted:

    I'm willing to give him a chance and 3 years is what I think GM's, Coaches, and even players should get. 3 strikes your out so to speak.
     
  3. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/e

    If you don't see improvement after 2 years why waste a third on him. I say keep TT if we compete this year. If not see ya
     
  4. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/etc.)

    Yeah that Divison Championship team that did not beat a single team with a winning record all year. Not one. Three of our six losses also came against teams without a winning record that year as well.

    The year Brett had to chuck it 540 times for over 4000 yards because even though the teams we played weren't very good our defense was terrible.

    And who came out of that year wanting a raise?

    Of Course. Javon Walker.
     
  5. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/etc.)

    I would take all of that over what we have now....wouldn't you? My God we are underdogs at home against St. Louis and New Orleans. We may not be favored all season at this rate. Is this the type of respect we were looking for?
     
  6. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    Re: [DEBATE] Thompson Vs ... (Overall impressions of TT/MM/etc.)

    I would take playing thirteen teams that end up with a losing record this year in a heartbeat. My point is just because we were 10-6 doesn't mean we were necessarily a very good football team.

    I believe that far into Shermans tenure with a schedule like that we should have been BETTER than we were rather than worse than previous years.

    I will concur with the thought that if in TT's fourth season we get a cupcake schedule like that and we don't go 10-6 minimum. He will get fired too.
     
  7. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    The difference is that in years 1-3 he was 12-4,12-4 and 10-6......not 4-12.

    TT's record will never catch up to Sherman's. He has lost 15 games already. Sherman didn't lose his 15th regular season game until his 4th year as GM!!!!

    Say what you want about Wolf's players or easy schedule, Sherman did all this while also acting as the head coach. Can't sneeze at these facts.
     
  8. ahaug82

    ahaug82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Messages:
    493
    Ratings:
    +0
    Another fact you can't sneeze at is that he only drafted 1 Pro Bowler. 9 of the 27 players he drafted are in the NFL right now. That's horrible.

    Sherman's record as a coach is impressive, but the fact is that his teams were built by Wolf. Sherman did little to add to what Wolf built, thus you have a decline in talent due to little talent addition and increase in age and injuries to the existing players. Add the major fact that it costs more money each year to keep the existing players and that there was very little cap space to do anything, and you have a train wreck.

    TT is dealing with Sherman's mess. I don't know if he's the man for the job, but I understand that it takes years to fix this sort of situation. You guys just look at the record, which in theory is the stone cold facts and represents exactly how good a team is. The only problem with that is, it's not. The talent of the team is just that, how good the players on the team are. I know what you're going to ask now: "How did they go 10-6 if the team was so bad?" Well, as it's just been stated by the posters above me, they played really bad teams. That's right, the 2004 Packers were overrated.

    Then TT comes in and has to somehow build a better team. He can't do that because he has no cap space available. What's the solution to that? You gotta let people go. There goes some Wolf picks that have been keeping the team afloat, and there is nobody on the roster that can step into the starting role. This was because of Sherman's crappy drafts. Ok, so then what? Sign some guys and draft some guys. TT signed some guys, they didn't work out. They were only temporary solutions anyway. The draft produced some promising players. Next year, the same thing happens (hopefully the FA's actually help this time though). It's looking like TT is moving in the right direction as far as the draft goes, but it's really too early to tell just how effective he is as a GM. His draft picks need to develop before we can make that decision.

    So go ahead and criticize TT if you'd like. Just don't put all the blame on him for the sudden collapse of the Packers. It's not all his fault.
     
  9. Cdnfavrefan

    Cdnfavrefan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,624
    Ratings:
    +0
    My one problem with TT still isn't his players cause I'll also give him some time. The one thing I still get upset at is letting Bates go but it must of been a personel thing as Thompson admits being comfortable with the head coach is very important. If you go back to the beginning of the year they said they're keeping exactly the same defence schemes Bates had and the only difference is an improvement in talent. If that is the case and our defence SO FAR looks twice as bad as last year, it doesn't take much to put 2 and 2 together and point some blame at the drop in coaching
     
  10. 4packgirl

    4packgirl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Messages:
    2,415
    Ratings:
    +0
    i'm sorry depack but i just don't get the whole 'respect' thing. when we are the lesser team, we are gonna be the underdog. i don't think it has anything to do with respect or the lack thereof. it has to do with the level of talent this team has right now. we are young & will get better but right now?? we're a marginal team at best.
     
  11. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1

    Waaaayy too long a post for my ADD mind. Especially since you didn't address the point but I do have a couple questions. How many Pro bowlers has TT drafted? Don't get too far ahead of yourself. And how many times did Sherman have a top 5 pick?

    On the other hand TT IS way ahead of Sherm in one category. It took Sherman 4 years to lose 20 games as a GM. TT will accomplish that in less than two.......So he's got that going for him!!!
     
  12. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,769
    Ratings:
    +2,994
    Sherman had how many years to get a player to the probowl..TT really has only one year..

    #1. Sherman took over a team that was full of Ron's players from drafts and FA..

    #2. Then each season those players left/injured/retired, then no real suitable backups/replacments were picked up..

    #3. TT is suppose to get them all replaced in his 1st year?
     
  13. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    "Sherman had how many years to get a player to the probowl..TT really has only one year..

    #1. Sherman took over a team that was full of Ron's players from drafts and FA..

    #2. Then each season those players left/injured/retired, then no real suitable backups/replacments were picked up..

    #3. TT is suppose to get them all replaced in his 1st year?"



    No kidding?

    Don't give me pro bowl nonsense or injury or who's players etc... 50 years from now the record books will show that Mike Sherman's record as GM was 44-20. What wil TT's be. Make all the excuses or reasons you want, I prefer to deal with facts and records. You know....wins/losses.

    You people can bash Sherman all you want until we get someone in here that can duplicate his record you are going to look foolish.
     
  14. net

    net Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    946
    Ratings:
    +62
    Florio: Sherman only?

    This from ProFootballTalk.com
    ------------------

    SHERMAN THE ONLY ONE TO BLAME FOR HORRENDOUS DRAFTS?

    It's becoming fashionable in the land of cheese and Lord Favre apologists to blame the team's track record of poor drafts during the Mike Sherman era on the guy who served for a period of time as both head coach and general manager.

    But, the last time we checked, Sherman wasn't the only front-office employee when guys like cornerback Ahmad Carroll were selected. Carroll, the team's first-round pick in the 2004 draft, was cut on Tuesday after being burned more thoroughly than a freckle-faced teenager who fell asleep in a tanning bed.

    If anything, Sherman might have had too much talent in the building. From "personnel analyst to the general manager" John Schneider (is that anything like assistant to the traveling secretary?) to director of pro personnel Reggie McKenzie to director of college scouting John Dorsey to the late Mark Hatley, the Packers were perceived as a Pro Bowl personnel department during Sherman's time as the poobah.

    During his tenure as G.M., there were whispers that Sherman didn't rely sufficiently on his lieutenants. But based on the stuff we've gleaned during five years of following the NFL as closely as a hungry dog watching its master eat a bag of beef jerky, someone had to set the table for Sherman when he picked guys like Carroll.

    The compilation of a team's draft board is a collaborative process, and there typically isn't much winging it that goes on while the picks are being made. Teams routinely labor for weeks over a ranking of all players, and a ranking of the players at each position.

    It's highly unlikely, then, that Sherman caught a wild hair after the Rams took Steven Jackson with the 24th pick and decided out of the blue that Carroll was the right call at No. 25. We can only assume, then, that the brain trust in Green Bay previously had determined that, between Carroll and Chris Gamble (who'd be drafted by the Panthers a few spots later), Carroll is the better player. And as history has demonstrated, he isn't.

    A similar argument can be made for every other failed Sherman pick.

    And if the truth is that Sherman had a goofball approach to the draft, ignoring the painstaking research that had been done and opting instead to throw darts or flip coins, our guess is that one of the capable and talented men working in the front office would have said something about it to someone in a moment of exasperation.

    But all we've ever heard is that Sherman didn't do a good job of delegating. Surely, he didn't build the board on his own. Surely, others had input in the mistakes that were made.

    We mention all of this for one reason. Though to the casual cheesehead some solace can be had in the notion that Sherman is out of the building, the more discerning Packer backer realizes that there are still many common threads between the regime that presided over some bad drafts -- and the one that currently is in power.
     
  15. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,769
    Ratings:
    +2,994
    I am not bashing Sherman??? I felt he was an awesome coach but as a gm IMO he was riding the coat tails of Wolfs players...And I gave reasons why I feel that way...Not excuses, but something that makes sesne to me..

    50 years from now the record books will show that as a GM and coach he had an excellent record..No one is that daft to say different..

    Or will they remember how he was sleeping while at the combine?
     
  16. spardo62

    spardo62 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    559
    Ratings:
    +0
    Re: Florio: Sherman only?

    This article does raise some red flags for those of us who have not been happy with the Sherman era drafts. Although Hatley(untimely death) and Sherman, the #'s 1 and 2 in the decision making process, are no longer in the equation.

    We also do not know the internal dymanics leading up to the draft or in the draft room, but have to hope that the people remaining and the new faces exhibit a better track record.
     
  17. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    How do these records come about? Good or bad.

    By the personnel put on the field.

    Ron W. retired as one of the most respected NFL personnel evaluators EVER.
    Mike Sherman was fired as GM for being the opposite.

    If you put the question to 32 personnel directors in this league "Was the talent on the team MS acguired and the talent when TT arrived:

    A) Equal?

    B) Poorer?

    C) Much Poorer?

    The hands down answer, without question, is C.

    When Ron W. came back last year and observed that there were way to many players with no more than European League talent that said volumes. And what was TT supposed to do with 2mil bucks. Make it all better?

    Brett Favre has said more than once this year that this is a very talented team but that they are VERY YOUNG. Young in the NFL means time. The time to develope.

    If MS could have even put 8 to 10 quality players thru the draft on the roster over all the years he was at the wheel we would be THAT MUCH FURTHER to being where we want to be.

    That's only a couple of players a year for crying out loud. Eight or ten guys that by now would have some experience and making a valuable contribution.

    MS record as a GM was very poor but what is hurting us the most right now is how badly he did in the first, second, and third rounds of the draft all those years.

    We're getting beat right now by teams whose first three round picks over the last five years are BETTER than what we can put out there. We've got some good young players now but rookies and 2nd year guys don't get you to the playoffs. Veterans do.
     
  18. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    The facts are clearly there that Sherman inherited a ton of Pro Bowl players in the making from Wolf. As I stated 10 of our 11 starters on offense were drafted or traded for by Ron Wolf. Everyone but Clifton and Tauscher had played in a Pro Bowl before and they were brought in by Ron Wolf as well. Our best defensive players were brought in by Wolf as well. Sharper, McKenzie, and KGB at the time.

    Sherman inherited a great team built by hopefully a soon to be HOF GM. Ted Thompson inherited a team on decline and a team who has been under poor management for at least 3 years prior. GB was 11 million over the cap when Thompson took over and GB had to get under. It's not an option. You have to get under.

    GB owed Wahle a huge roster bonus which they could not pay. So they had to release him. Thompson failed to re-sign him then and that appears to be his greatest mistake to date. Sharper refused to take a pay cut so Thompson had to cut him as well. Thompson inherited a mess of cap room and poor drafts from Sherman.

    As a Head Coach Sherman was solid. He new how to win games as a Head Coach. There is a difference in being a Head Coach and GM of a team though and as a GM Sherman was poor. He brought in one Pro Bowl player in his tenure. That was Javon Walker. The rest were all brought in by Ron Wolf. From KGB to Brett Favre.

    Let's see if Ted Thompson can get the job done though before we grab the pitchforks. He‘s pretty much used his 1st 2 off seasons to fix the cap and clean house with bad draft picks. Now he has finally been able to get the youth movement he wants in. It‘s going to take more than year 1 for Moll, Spitz, Jennings, Hawk, Collins, and Poppinga to dominate at their positions. Like I said by next year if we‘re not seeing any improvement then he needs to go. 3 years seems to be the fair number in this league. 1 or 2 is a little early.. It's not an excuse. It's a fact that Wolf built a team that was good for years after he was gone. GB started to feel the affects of Sherman's tenure just last year. TT decided to rebuild. It's now his team and he should be given a chance and he shouldn’t be singled out when others failed to get the job done as well.
     
  19. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,769
    Ratings:
    +2,994
    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.
     
  20. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Re: Florio: Sherman only?

    I always wondered why TT kept on most of the guys that Sherman had. There must have been at least a little familiarity from when Thompson was here before.
     
  21. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Look nobody is "grabbing pitchforks". I'm defending Sherman and all your "Facts" are just opinions. 44-20 those are numerical facts that even TT Sherman haters will never be able to change. Etched into the history books forever. Beat it or end this thread. It's your choice.
     
  22. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,769
    Ratings:
    +2,994
    One MAYBE could compare this to Tampa..

    Dungy leaves and next year they win SB...How many times during that span did you hear, it was players that Dungy brought in..

    This might be an extreme example but you get my dift..
     
  23. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    Sherman had a winning team 4 years after Wolf left. In Tampa Bay I don't believe Dungy was bringing players in. Rich McKay was.
     
  24. warhawk

    warhawk Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,922
    Ratings:
    +38
    It's a "fact" that he either DID or DIDN'T draft an acceptable number of quality players that are contributing to THIS team.

    It's also a "fact" that HOW WELL a GM does in the draft has an effect on a football team and how competitive it is.

    Name a team that drafts like crap for years and then becomes a good team. There aren't any. Now that's a fact.
     
  25. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    Actually not all the facts are opinions

    Here are facts

    Brett Favre
    Ahman Green
    William Henderson
    Donald Driver
    Bubba Franks
    Mike Wahle
    Marco Rivera
    Chad Clifton
    Mark Tauscher
    Mike Flaniagan
    Darren Sharper
    KGB
    Mike McKenzie

    That's the list of probably our best players from that era and all of those guys were brought in by none other than Ron Wolf. Those are facts. You can argue all you want that Sherman's record was this as a GM. That's more of a testament to his job of a coach but as a GM that was Ron Wolf's team built by Ron Wolf. This team is no longer Mike Sherman's or Ron Wolf's. This team is now Ted Thompson and Ted Thompson decided the best thing for this team because of the current state of cap and age of the team was to rebuild. Let's see what he can do but to give credit for teams that consistently went to the playoffs to just Mike Sherman is way off base when Sherman wasn't responsible for the great players those teams had. Ron Wolf was and the above proves it.
     

Share This Page