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

I rest my case, or at least provide some key evidence

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by net, Mar 19, 2007.

  1. digsthepack

    digsthepack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    MS spent every year of his tenure sacrificing the future for the moment..all well and good if he secures another SB trophy, but he didn't. And the fruit of his fruitless venture falls to someone else.

    Let's face it, he had Favre during his late prime, Green at his peak, argueably the best o-line of the decade for 5 years running; a middling defense that he never improved in any significant way...but straddled his team with offensive "genius" Tom Rossley, special teams "genius" Frank Novak' and defensive "geniuses" Donatell and Slowik.

    Had he only drafted smarter, and had even modest success in FA, he could have reached a SB in that window...but he didn't...and left the team spent like a whore in the wild west after the cowboys left town to go back to the range.
     
  2. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Man......the last few posts really hit the nail on the head. Thats what i saw also. Sherman had all he needed to win the big one, but frittered it all away, and left nothing for the next coach coming in.
    Then GB goes 4-12, because of the poor drafting the previous several years, and the new coach and GM get blamed for it.
    I ALWAYS thought Sherman underachieved with what he had to work with, but was afraid to post it for fear of being labeled a "Sherman basher". He had Favre when he was still in the top end of NFL QB's. Yet he couldn't even win playoff games in Lambeau Field when he needed to to go onto the next level.
    TT inherited "chicken s**t", and is trying hard to make chicken soup out of it. He's getting the pieces in place, but if you only get a very limited amount of pieces of the puzzle to add every year, it's gonna take awhile to get the puzzle completed. Even the great Ron Wolf didn't make the Packers SB winners after 2 years on the job. And as i remember, MANY fans were calling for Wolf's head when he traded to get an unknown QB named "FARVE" or something like that to play in GB. Yet look how THAT turned out. Wolf had his share of misses in the draft too. But his GOOD moves overshadowed his goofs, and i think most of us look at him as one heck of a GM. But even with all that, the fact is the Packers only won ONE SB during that run, when they were SO close a couple more times. Had the Cowboys not been there to mess them up, maybe we would have had a few more trophies in the trophy case right now. I think if we had the Packers of the 1990's playing this decade, we'd almost be unstoppable in the NFC. The 49'ers were pretty darn good during that stretch too. They and the Cowboys haven't done a whole heck of a lot since then either.

    But the haters will just go on hating, no matter what the results are. I don't understand WHY there is such an obvious deep seated hate, but it's there.
    Me, i haven't seen enough evidence either way to say TT is good or bad. To me, the jury is still out. I see Hawk, Jennings, Pickett, Woodson, and others as good additions. These are not moves of an idiot or tightwad. They are calculated moves to improve the team. And like i said before, no GM hits on all draft picks. Thats not realistic to expect him to. Now, if he bombed on a first round pick, THEN i might question his ability to choose talent. But AJ Hawk has looked pretty good so far. Aaron Rodgers is really an unknown commodity right now.
    Of course hindsight is ALWAYS 20-20 for us. It's easy to look back at a draft 2 years ago and say who SHOULD have been picked. The GM's don't have that luxery of course. Last year, i think it was Mario Williams that was picked #1 in the draft. I STILL can't believe someone would let Reggie Bush go if they had the #1 pick. But they did!
    Look at 1999......the Packers took TONY "MANWICH" (thats what i called him) with the #1 pick, and let BARRY SANDERS pass. I don't remember what number Sanders was picked at, but i DO know several other teams passed on him in the draft too. Can you imagine what it would have been like to have Sanders and Favre in the same backfield? We COULD have had that. But the GM messed up BIG time on that.
    If TT made a blunder of those proportions, i'd be ticked off at him. But so far, i haven't seen evidence of him NOT knowing his job.
     
  3. PackFanInSC

    PackFanInSC Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    563
    Ratings:
    +0
    Sanders was drafted 3rd in the 89 draft -- Dallas and the Packers were the only ones to let him by.

    1989 draft order

    Troy Aikman
    Tony Mandarich
    Barry Sanders
    Derrick Thomas
    Deion Sanders

    Other Picks we took in that draft were

    Matt Brock DE (3rd)
    Jeff Graham QB (4th)
    Jeff Query WR (5th)
    Chris Jacke K (6th)
    Mark Hall DE (7th)
    Thomas King DB (8th)
    Brian Shulman P (8th)
    Scott Kirby T (9th)
    Ben Jessie DB (10th)
    Cedric Stallworth DB (11th)
    Stan Shiver DB (12th)

    Can anyone even remember more than 4 or 5 of those players? If we needed DBs so badly as to use 4 of our 10 picks on them, how many other areas could we have addressed had we only taken the OTHER Sanders (Deion) in the 1st round.

    Of course, we then could have had a mostly FSU defensive backfield when we drafted Butler in 90 and Buckley in 92. Or -- would we have drafted them then? Looking back, there are not a lot of memorable names immediately following them in those drafts but hindsight is 20-20.

    A GM's job is not unlike your personnel manager at your job. They compare the needs to the available bodies to plug into the job. Sometimes they miss and hire a real dud and can hopefully get rid of him before too much damage is done. Other times, they find that diamond in the rough that can really shine. But, very few times is it a lock when they make the decision.
     

Share This Page