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!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

In Ted We Trust?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by BorderRivals.com, Mar 25, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BorderRivals.com

    BorderRivals.com Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    594
    Ratings:
    +499
    As some may know from my posts, I'm a Ted apologist. He has done a hell of a job building a team that is perennially one of the best in the league. Our record proves this. But, my trust is starting to wain for two reasons.

    1. It's one thing to not being an active player in free agency. It's completely different to be opposed to it, as TT seems to be. Packers can't afford to be major players. But, we aren't hamstrung. We can afford to, and need to, add a veteran or two - at the right price - to shore up key holes, particularly on the D-line.

    2. Brad Jones just signed for 3-years and $11.25M, $3M guaranteed. This another instance of TT overpaying homegrown talent. It's inexcusable.

    Read more for specifics on why my trust in Ted is being pushed. http://wp.me/p29VCs-gJ

    It's fair to ask, is Ted the right guy for the job of putting the Packers in the best position possible to win the SB each year? A draft-and-develop philosophy creates sustained success. But, I don't think, by itself, it will allow the Packers to house more Super Bowls with the narrow window we have.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  2. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    2. Russ Ball?
     
  3. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,871
    Ratings:
    +1,400
    Why would you describe the Packers' window as narrow? I don't understand that at all. Ted's whole approach is designed to avoid the "window" and rather remain competitive year after year. Our franchise QB is probably 10 years away from retirement and we have plenty of young talent on the roster. I dont know why anyone would say we have a narrow window.

    Some valid points elsewhere, but to answer your last question I would say absolutely yes he is the right man for the job.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
  4. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,935
    Ratings:
    +3,029
    As I've posted I'd really like to see a mid-level UFA DL or safety signed but keep in mind, the UFA period is not over and teams are even allowed to sign vet players after the draft. It's even possible other teams will waive veteran players after the draft and it's possible, albeit unlikely, Thompson will consider signing one of them. IOW, let's wait until TC is closer before passing judgment on this off season's acquisitions.

    I also think we need to keep in mind there's no perfect philosophy or system for building a team and winning championships. And even if there were, GMs make mistakes. Thompson certainly has: For example, even he would have to admit the extension he offered to Hawk was a mistake since he's "fixed" it. And of course he's missed on players like every GM. I also think he's had some bad luck lately like Sherrod and Perry since neither had a reputation of being injury-prone when drafted. I think he made a mistake with the Jones contract but if Bishop doesn't get healthy and Smith can't return this season, it'll make more sense.

    I agree with adambr2: IMO the Packers' window perfectly correlates with Rodgers' career. And speaking of Rodgers, how much credit will Thompson (and Ball and staff) get if by opening day, they've locked up both Rodgers and Matthews to long-term contracts? Not exciting I know but still…
     
  5. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,569
    Ratings:
    +1,454
    Let's look at who made some of the biggest differences in our 2010 Super Bowl run. Obviously all of our drafted players such as Rodgers, all our WRs, Raji and Matthews, and the rest of the defensive players. However, that year TT got Zombo as a UDFA, signed Walden as a free agent, and grabbed Howard Green off of waivers. Those minor signings were huge additions to the team that season as Zombo/Walden were really good down the stretch, and Green stuffed the run (Jets game) and forced the Roethlisburger INT/TD for Nick Collins. I will relent that those guys didn't pan out over the long haul, but TT didn't break the bank on signing those players and still achieved the goal...which is to be competitive each season with a chance at the Super Bowl. The GM can only do so much. The coaches and players are equally responsible for doing everything they can to win it.

    I'm also not sure if its fiscally prudent to sign a big or semi-big name FA with three major contracts still in negotiation with Rodgers, Matthews, and Raji. A minor swing in the players' favor in each negotiation could cumulatively sink a semi-big FA deal. Why risk it, especially when our biggest problem was injury this season? Why spend a ton replacing guys that should be playing in 2013?

    I'm not losing faith in TT. He has more than earned my trust. Could he better? Heck yeah, we all could. I'm not going to start throwing him down the stairs though. Seems quite rash. You call me complacent. I call it being rational.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. BorderRivals.com

    BorderRivals.com Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    594
    Ratings:
    +499
    Of course our window of opportunity to win correlates to Rodgers career. But, at the same time, we thought the same thing after Favre's SB, and that was our only win. We can't be caught continually building for the future without taking advantage of the opportunities in the present.

    There is no doubt that Ted's draft-and-develop philosophy has built this team to where it is now - perennial contenders. But, without doing something else - i.e. signing a key player here or there, beyond just the leftovers - would better allow the Packers to take advantage of the present without jeopardizing the future. And, this can clearly be accomplished based on Jones' most recent deal. As my post in the link asks, who'd you rather have: Brad Jones - a special-teamer and backup ILB - or S. Jax at basically the same cost? It's a no brainer. Add in Kuhn's $2.35M and you have a GM that for some reason overvalues his own, yet undervalues players outside the organization. His valuation should be consistent and be willing to be "daring," if you will, and get a guy in free agency - at the right cost - that can immediately pay dividends while the draft picks mature, grow, and learn under this veteran for a year or two.

    Because of this, it's fair, in my mind, to start wondering whether TT was the man for the job to build this franchise up, but may not be the man for the job to balance the future sustained success, while also making moves for the present. I don't want to look back in 10 years and have only SB XLV to show for our team's success.
     
  7. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,122
    Ratings:
    +4,082
    I don't see how we are overpaying for jones. With the interest he had it appears he took his offers to the packers and said what can you do.

    3 players are overpaid on the team maybe 4. More than that are under paid
     
  8. BorderRivals.com

    BorderRivals.com Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    594
    Ratings:
    +499
    Brad Jones was a third-stringer, special-teamer entering the season. The only reason he saw the field was because of multiple injuries. Did he perform well? Sure. But, he's still a backup if the injured players come back as expected. And even though I like him returning as insurance and special-teams play, he's not worth what he signed for and certainly shouldn't be the 10th highest paid player on the team. If other teams wanted to overpay for him, let them. That money could be better spent on an impact starter in free agency or used towards extending the likes of Shields, Raji, etc.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,983
    Ratings:
    +1,009
    We agree on this. This wasn't a good signing by any stretch. You don't give a backup that type of money i don't care how well he "knows the system". That money could be used elsewhere on lets see ummm?? how about a starter! He TT is overrated as a GM imo and my stance hasn't changed in regards to that. How can you call a guy who overpays average players great?? So no, in Ted i don't trust.
     
  10. burt packerack

    burt packerack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    250
    Ratings:
    +99
    I always agree with drafting and developing players way over signing big/semi-big names. TT seems to always look long-term which I've grown to appreciate more each year. I would rather us draft/develop a player and see how he ends up towards his contract years than sign a big name and pay him big $ and see if it pans out well.
     
  11. burt packerack

    burt packerack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    250
    Ratings:
    +99
    Although I thought this Brad Jones sign was a bit much.
     
  12. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,122
    Ratings:
    +4,082
    So bc at one point he was a back up/STs guy you discount his season or ability to perform?
     
  13. BorderRivals.com

    BorderRivals.com Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    594
    Ratings:
    +499
    Not really what I said. Bishop was exactly that, and has proven to be a very good ILB. I'm not against that. But, Bishop showed his talents when he had the chance and deserved the spot going forward. Jones didn't impress in his opportunity. He was just a guy. Replaceable and certainly not worth the tenth most money on the team.

    Reports are Michael Huff is coming in for a visit next week maybe. I really hope TT proves me wrong and willing to make that "splash" for a key veteran FA to fill crucial holes on this roster!
     
  14. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,532
    Ratings:
    +1,839
    Look - what you are missing here is the 'FA path to winning now' approach does not improve your chance of winning a superbowl. Think of it this way, each season there are 5 or 6 teams heading in who have a 'good' shot at winning the Superbowl. Say 5 teams have a 15% shot, 5 more teams have a 5% shot and the remaining 10% for the other 22 teams.

    The best you can do as a GM is to find a couple of 'franchise' core players; fill the roster with talent; and hope that each season a few of your young players up their game to become playmakers - enough to put you over the edge and give yourself a great shot at the Superbowl. Still - along the way, several things can happen to derail the season of even the best of teams. TT has done an amazing job of putting and keeping us in the upper tier of SB favorites for several years now. More than any GM has done. Ravens have hit it twice, but I would have put our chances higher over the TT reign - just hasn't worked out but once.

    The problem with the FA approach is that the FAs: Take up a roster spot away from a potentially up-and-comer; Screw up your team chemistry; upset the players out-performing their contracts; screw up your salary cap; etc; etc; MOST FA signings are regretted by the team. There is a finite salary cap - spending on one player means you have less to spend on another.

    There is a reason that no team heavy into FA signings has won the Superbowl in a long time. It decreases your odds. If the Pack had a 15% shot this year, and signing FA xxxx would up that to 18% however, because of the salary cap hit, your odds in the next few years will drop to 10% because of the reasons cited above. Was it worth it? Was it a good signing even if the player was better? Hell no. So why do so many GMs sign FAs? Because things are different in other markets - they have to advertise to sell tickets. A big FA signing helps sell tickets. Packers, of course, don't have to worry about that.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,569
    Ratings:
    +1,454
    I don't know much about the Brad Jones signing, but did read somewhere that it was starter money. Then again, every season it seems that we lose our ILBs to injury so maybe it's forward thinking? Not being apologetic here, just don't know the rationale yet.
    That's an opinion, not a fact, that you wouldn't jeopardize the future.
    I disagree here as well. While the RB position would benefit from an upgrade, scoring points has not been a problem for this team. Defense seems to be the consensus concern. If the team feels that Jones is ready to step into the lead role - maybe taking over for Hawk, who they negotiated down - then it's a brilliant move. You prefer to criticize it because Stephan Jackson is already an established player, which can also mean that he's a retread. No brainer? Only if you're 100% certain that he will succeed.
    He values known commodities more than unknowns. Just because Player X thrived on Team A, does not mean he will play better than Player Y on Team B. A good GM understands a team's personality and how it functions as much as he sees stats and contract values.
    Actually, his valuation is consistent which is what bothers you. It is consistently sour towards free agency unless he sees deals. Also, a draft pick might mature, grow, and learn under this veteran for a few years but you then may not be able to afford him once the rookie contract expires and you're dealing with dead cap space from a FA deal that you signed years ago. Your beliefs about how the NFL works are not guarantees. In fact, most franchises prove that continued dipping into FA is a recipe for ruin. Picking up FA is not a bad idea but they should be the right fit and at the right price.
    From what I've seen, teams that throw away the horse that got them to the race rarely find a better horse to finish the race.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  16. BorderRivals.com

    BorderRivals.com Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    594
    Ratings:
    +499
    I think you missed my point. I completely agree that the Packers should stay away from being heavy hitters in FA. That rarely yields success. But, my point is that the Packers should use FA wisely in signing key veteran cogs when the price is right. Think the likes of Richard Seymour, Chris Canty, S. Jax, etc.

    Put it this way - would the money spent on Jones be better spent on S. Jax? It's basically the same salary. It's a no brainer in my opinion. Signing these types of veterans does not hurt the cap. It's a move to win now without jeopardizing the future.

    You see Atlanta doing just this right now. Signing S. Jax and Osi (I haven't seen the numbers, but I can't imagine it's too bad). Two moves that help win now and (presumably, depending on Osi' contract) don't hamstring them in the future when they need to resign Ryan, Roddy, etc. And they still retained their young, stud Safety in William Moore.
     
  17. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,569
    Ratings:
    +1,454
    The flaw in your thinking is the assumption that these moves automatically made them better. That is your premise, and most of us disagree. You could be right, but they didn't win anything yet.
     
  18. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,532
    Ratings:
    +1,839
    NO!
    There is no exemptions for the salary cap that I know of. How can singing a 30 year old RB on the decline be a good future move for the Packers? Over an up-and-coming line backer? You have completely missed my point. Say we sign SJ. We are still a SB favorite, maybe the odds of us winning improve by 1%. Thats it. Now we get him for 2 years of effective service before we have to replace him. Now what? We are out several million that we can use for other players. Our odds then go down -2% for 3 years because of that one move.
    Of course it impacts the future. Not just monetarily, but I am not going to repeat my earlier post.
    How many Superbowls has Atlanta won recently? So TT wins a Superbowl and puts us in the elite category for about 5 years now - and you would prefer a team that has been sportatic and has signed some big name FA's? It just doesn't make an ounce of sense to me.
     
  19. adambr2

    adambr2 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,871
    Ratings:
    +1,400
    I wish there was some parallel alternate universe in which you became the Packers GM. I would absolutely love to check in on that in 5 years and see what kind of shape the franchise was in.
     
  20. Spanish Rose

    Spanish Rose Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    430
    Ratings:
    +61
    Seems like your completely missing the point.. If anything border rivals was pretty forward about not being able to make a "splash" fa signing because of the upcoming contracts.. Let me reiterate his question.. Who would you rather have? Jones or Jackson? Jones or Canty? Jones or Jenkins? If we come back healthy, jones is yet again a special teams player and back up lb.. He was just a guy last year he was most certainly not starter material.. If another team wants to throw that money at him then so be it but I doubt we'd have much drop off without him don't ya think? Is he really indispensable? No not by a long shot but TT is "hung" up on his own players. I've said it before he's a stubborn gm who feels himself too much.. Give me Kraft, that's a gm that uses all tools given to get the job done.. A gm not afraid to take a calculated risk to get another ring..he swung and missed on haynesworth and got rid of his ***.. He swung and smacked it outta the park with welker and moss and I believe the small parts he added this year has them pushing for another..your good with one ring at the end of Rodgers career? I'm most certainly not I have bigger expectations and demand more from my team..Ted doesn't like change but change isn't bad
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  21. PWT

    PWT Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    239
    Ratings:
    +60
    Brad Jones was every down inside line backer after injuries to Desmon Bishop and D.J. Smith last season Jones was considered better than Hawk in pass coverge and held middle linebacker position in the Packer dime defense.

    Jones Jones was third on the team in tackles (102) in regular season, despite not becoming a starter until fianl 10 games of regular season. Jones ended up playing 673 defensive snaps, which ranked 7th on the team .
    He had 2 sacks and six passes defended in the regular season.
    .
    In playoffs, .Jones had second most defensive snaps. (138)

    Jones is likely to have some role on defense, whether it is starter or defensive coordunator Dom Capers passing down packages (nickle and dime) Caper like to mix or match personel to his specific game plans. so there are ways he could work alll three (Jones Bishop and Hawk) into playing position.

    But Jones also provides protection, in case Bishop isn't the same player after having his hamstring surgically repaired in August.



    At a minimum, J ones is the front runner for lone inside linebacvker role ahead of Bishop and Hawk.

    Sources : Green Bay Press-Gazette Article entitled: $11.75M deal for Jones dated 3/23/13 and Article by Press-Gazette Sports reporter Pete Dougherty entitled :Jones joins competitive crowd at inside linebacker dated 3/22/13
     
  22. Spanish Rose

    Spanish Rose Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    430
    Ratings:
    +61
    Really ivo? You don't see how he overspent for jones bro? You have too much "faith" in a human man..it was a mistake no matter how you try and rationalize on it.. Funny thing is tho I still believe we have a team that could take the chip again.. I wouldn't let anyone outside pack fans try and tell me different.. And Amish your on pcp if you'd rather have jones than Jackson lmao that's obsurd your on one man
     
  23. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,532
    Ratings:
    +1,839
    I understand his point. He thinks signing FAs will improve the team.

    How many Superbowls have the Patriots won in the last few years? None. How many of their big name players are they able to keep? Welker? They are fortunate that Brady took a big pay cut in order to help the team, or they would really be up a creek. That is my point. The Pats upped their chances by bringing in FAs, but are paying for it going forward, and it didn't get them a SB. I'm in Vegas and I have a Masters degree and math background, so maybe I think about this differently. You have a better chance to win a SB over a 5 year period if your odds are 15% each year than if your odds are 16%,16%,12%,12%, and 12% over the same 5 year period.


    Let me answer the question again - YES! I would rather have Jones than Jackson, Canty, or Jenkins. The Packers are a better team because of it over the next few years.
     
  24. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,983
    Ratings:
    +1,009
    I agree, No way would i pass over Jackson for Brad Jones man seriously? not only that i know alot of you guy's will disagree but maybe target James Harrison and see if he woulda excepted the contract Jones did. There were many other ways..better wyas that money could have been used, and on better players.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  25. Spanish Rose

    Spanish Rose Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    430
    Ratings:
    +61
    How are they a better team in the long run with jones??? He cost the same as Jackson and MORE than Canty and Jenkins.. he plays a position, that if everyone is healthy, is filled with players..
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page