In Ted We Trust?

Status
Not open for further replies.

HyponGrey

Caseus Locutus Est
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
3,758
Reaction score
221
Location
South Jersey
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..
Assuming any of those three ever even considered actually coming here as opposed to simply using our organization to set minimum market value. The way I see it, Jones will be replacing Hawk in the not so far future in every sense. Note that both contracts expire in 2016.
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
[quote="Spanish Rose, post: 494259, member: 1541"Ted doesn't like change but change isn't bad[/quote]

Are we talking about the same Ted? The one who decided to go ahead and jumpstart the Aaron Rodgers era in 2008 and make a decision to change that risked his entire job and alienated many fans? The one with a 20% roster turnover every year? Pretty sure that Ted isn't afraid of change.
 

Spanish Rose

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
430
Reaction score
15
Rodgers was "HIS" guy and if he could've made the change of qb sooner he would've. Of course he had to "change" the team in the beginning of his tenure because, well, that's what he was brought in to do.. It's when someone has created what they intended to, thats when you really get a sense if someone likes or is open to "change"..he's not open to "change" outside of his own if you know what I'm saying.. 20% roster turnover??? Haha your numbers are way out of wack
 

Spanish Rose

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
430
Reaction score
15
Assuming any of those three ever even considered actually coming here as opposed to simply using our organization to set minimum market value. The way I see it, Jones will be replacing Hawk in the not so far future in every sense. Note that both contracts expire in 2016.
I believe that's manning.. And if and when bishop can't play, it's smith
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
Rodgers was "HIS" guy and if he could've made the change of qb sooner he would've. Of course he had to "change" the team in the beginning of his tenure because, well, that's what he was brought in to do.. It's when someone has created what they intended to, thats when you really get a sense if someone likes or is open to "change"..he's not open to "change" outside of his own if you know what I'm saying.. 20% roster turnover??? Haha your numbers are way out of wack


Wow were you ever wrong....but yeah, my numbers were off too, the number is actually closer to 30%...

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com...-Jennings-Grant-good-gone-annual-roster-churn

“Change is constant, and I think everybody understands that,” said Packers coach Mike McCarthy at his season-ending press conference last week. “I don’t exactly know what the statistics are, but I know it has been around 20 percent for us, the way your roster changes every year, and that will probably hold true this year. We’re a draft and develop football team, just the way we always teach and program everything to the youngest guy to make sure everyone’s given an opportunity to make our 53. I’m thinking we’ll definitely be in that position again.”
McCarthy’s message couldn’t have been more direct. The promise of a 20 percent churn in the roster means at least 11 players on the current team will be gone.
But his estimate was actually low. Since 2007 the Packers’ year-ending final roster, compared to the previous season, has turned over at a rate exceeding 30 percent.
 

Spanish Rose

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
430
Reaction score
15
Wow were you ever wrong....but yeah, my numbers were off too, the number is actually closer to 30%...

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com...-Jennings-Grant-good-gone-annual-roster-churn

“Change is constant, and I think everybody understands that,” said Packers coach Mike McCarthy at his season-ending press conference last week. “I don’t exactly know what the statistics are, but I know it has been around 20 percent for us, the way your roster changes every year, and that will probably hold true this year. We’re a draft and develop football team, just the way we always teach and program everything to the youngest guy to make sure everyone’s given an opportunity to make our 53. I’m thinking we’ll definitely be in that position again.”
McCarthy’s message couldn’t have been more direct. The promise of a 20 percent churn in the roster means at least 11 players on the current team will be gone.
But his estimate was actually low. Since 2007 the Packers’ year-ending final roster, compared to the previous season, has turned over at a rate exceeding 30 percent.
Haha dude your "turnover" comes from the draft.. We consistently have about 9 picks in the draft.. There's your average of about "11" player turnover.. Once again, "teddys guys"..Your missing the point lol
 

HyponGrey

Caseus Locutus Est
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
3,758
Reaction score
221
Location
South Jersey
I believe that's manning.. And if and when bishop can't play, it's smith
I have that in the exact opposite order. With his frame and coverage skills Manning is definitely Bishop's eventual replacement, and Smith's run support would make him Hawks. Remember, Hawk shifted to the weak side while Smith was in. But, just like Hawk, the brass likes Jones.
 

rodell330

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5,611
Reaction score
493
Location
Canton, Ohio
Haha dude your "turnover" comes from the draft.. We consistently have about 9 picks in the draft.. There's your average of about "11" player turnover.. Once again, "teddys guys"..Your missing the point lol

Heres my thing. TT went prodominantly defense last year right? He knew we had to get better on that side of the ball but his philosophy is build through the draft. Well only Casey Hayward had a real impact on that side of the ball.
 

13 Times Champs

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
3,924
Reaction score
424
Location
Virginia
Heres my thing. TT went prodominantly defense last year right? He knew we had to get better on that side of the ball but his philosophy is build through the draft. Well only Casey Hayward had a real impact on that side of the ball.
Agree, while some will say wait and see I'm a doubter on that draft.
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,270
Reaction score
2,387
Location
PENDING
Haha dude your "turnover" comes from the draft.. We consistently have about 9 picks in the draft.. There's your average of about "11" player turnover.. Once again, "teddys guys"..Your missing the point lol
Lol! Although you are serious, this is hilarious! Even faced with simple facts; clearly written; proving you were wrong - you still argue.

By the way, who is TT replacing? Other TT guys! That has to be very confusing for TT, a guy who only wants TT guys.

Heres my thing. TT went prodominantly defense last year right? He knew we had to get better on that side of the ball but his philosophy is build through the draft. Well only Casey Hayward had a real impact on that side of the ball.

All true. But keep in mind it is draft and develop policy. We still need to wait for the 'develop' part of that.
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
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

I feel we over paid Finley, Crosby, and Hawk. But Jones? Nope. I cant imagine he just drastically paid him more than another team.

People are just upset bc he wasnt some big name in FA who is past their prime.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
1,610
Reaction score
517
Location
Madison, WI
Heres my thing. TT went prodominantly defense last year right? He knew we had to get better on that side of the ball but his philosophy is build through the draft. Well only Casey Hayward had a real impact on that side of the ball.

That strikes me as an impossibly high standard. Hayward was phenomenal. If "Likely Future Pro Bowler" is what you want from rookie seasons, I understand why you're disappointed.

Worthy, Daniels, and Perry all had rookie moments. They also had moments of, "Oh, I see why what TT liked about that guy." Daniels and Worthy had 2 and 2.5 sacks each, Perry had 2 in limited time. That's not bad, not bad at all.
 

Spanish Rose

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
430
Reaction score
15
Lol! Although you are serious, this is hilarious! Even faced with simple facts; clearly written; proving you were wrong - you still argue.

By the way, who is TT replacing? Other TT guys! That has to be very confusing for TT, a guy who only wants TT guys.



All true. But keep in mind it is draft and develop policy. We still need to wait for the 'develop' part of that.
Haha bro your the one who used turnover as "change". Turnover happens every year but that's not the change I'm speaking of.. Like I said your completely missing the point and maybe even your own lmao.. And yea it must be difficult for TT, especially since nobody knows what your talking about
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
Seriously, fans need to get it through their heads that we're just not going to win the Super Bowl every year. It's impossible. The best we can do is what we're already doing, which is to be competitive and have a chance to win the title every year. Any expectations above that is both naive and unrealistic.
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
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'd argue we should wait until Jan/Feb before passing judgements on this off-season's acquisitions.
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
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're under the impression he actually wanted to play here. There's speculation he wanted to go to Atlanta and used us as a way of trying to drive up his value. Atlanta has a lot of benefits for an older running back out to prove himself- namely the option to start and carry a heavy load, and playing indoors. With us he'd likely be the feature back, but we're not a team that relies on the run, meaning he'd basically be just another guy on our team.
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
Heres my thing. TT went prodominantly defense last year right? He knew we had to get better on that side of the ball but his philosophy is build through the draft. Well only Casey Hayward had a real impact on that side of the ball.

Funny thing about the draft and develop philosophy- Some players need time to, you know, develop.
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
A good reminder that we fans aren't privy to all the details, like the front office staff is, come from a piece from Cheesehead TV on four of last season's forgotten players who were lost due to injury, but will be making their return this season: http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/four-of-last-seasons-forgotten-names-to-remember-for-2013

It's a good reminder that nothing is ever as simple, or as black and white as some fans would like for it to be. Most fans have no idea what our salary obligations are for the next several years, or how contract negotiations with some of our premiere players are going, and how it may impact our salary cap down the line. We also tend to forget lesser named, developing players returning from injury. These are things our GM has to know, and keep track of, but we fans necessarily don't. Just something to think about before going overboard to criticize our GM for not making that splashy free agent signing.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
You're under the impression he actually wanted to play here. There's speculation he wanted to go to Atlanta and used us as a way of trying to drive up his value. Atlanta has a lot of benefits for an older running back out to prove himself- namely the option to start and carry a heavy load, and playing indoors. With us he'd likely be the feature back, but we're not a team that relies on the run, meaning he'd basically be just another guy on our team.

ATL passes more than we do; that thesis doesn't hold much water.
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
Haha bro your the one who used turnover as "change". Turnover happens every year but that's not the change I'm speaking of.. Like I said your completely missing the point and maybe even your own lmao.. And yea it must be difficult for TT, especially since nobody knows what your talking about

Right...because using the word "turnover" that describes how much of the roster actually "changed" as "change" is ridiculous. :rolleyes:

Let's go over the timeline here. First you tried to say Ted didn't like change. Then you were given examples of how wrong that was. Then you changed your story to say that Rodgers replacing Favre didn't really count as "change" because Rodgers' was "his guy" (as opposed to any other draft pick or FA that a GM finds, apparently, who aren't "their guy"). :rolleyes:

Then you tried to say that given stats saying that 20% of the roster turned over every year were "way off"...then you were provided a link showing how the turnover rate was actually even higher than that. So at that point you tried to change your story again and say that you really meant other team's FA's brought in as change.

You tried to make a point, and you were showed to be wrong, then when you continued, you were given a link to show why you were wrong. YOU'RE wrong. Suck it up and deal with it instead of trying to backtrack every time one of your points goes up in smoke.
 

Spanish Rose

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
430
Reaction score
15
A good reminder that we fans aren't privy to all the details, like the front office staff is, come from a piece from Cheesehead TV on four of last season's forgotten players who were lost due to injury, but will be making their return this season: http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/four-of-last-seasons-forgotten-names-to-remember-for-2013

It's a good reminder that nothing is ever as simple, or as black and white as some fans would like for it to be. Most fans have no idea what our salary obligations are for the next several years, or how contract negotiations with some of our premiere players are going, and how it may impact our salary cap down the line. We also tend to forget lesser named, developing players returning from injury. These are things our GM has to know, and keep track of, but we fans necessarily don't. Just something to think about before going overboard to criticize our GM for not making that splashy free agent signing.
LOVE that article and wish more writers would do pieces like this because a lot of casual fans don't take something like that into consideration.. I know it might seem like I'm a TT hater and thats just not the case I just demand perfection from myself and anything else I associate myself with.. Make no mistake I'd still argue we have the best roster in the league
 

Spanish Rose

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
430
Reaction score
15
Right...because using the word "turnover" that describes how much of the roster actually "changed" as "change" is ridiculous. :rolleyes:

Let's go over the timeline here. First you tried to say Ted didn't like change. Then you were given examples of how wrong that was. Then you changed your story to say that Rodgers replacing Favre didn't really count as "change" because Rodgers' was "his guy" (as opposed to any other draft pick or FA that a GM finds, apparently, who aren't "their guy"). :rolleyes:

Then you tried to say that given stats saying that 20% of the roster turned over every year were "way off"...then you were provided a link showing how the turnover rate was actually even higher than that. So at that point you tried to change your story again and say that you really meant other team's FA's brought in as change.

You tried to make a point, and you were showed to be wrong, then when you continued, you were given a link to show why you were wrong. YOU'RE wrong. Suck it up and deal with it instead of trying to backtrack every time one of your points goes up in smoke.
He doesn't like a change in his philosophy bro how ignorant do you have to be? You just keep saying crap really, how does any of what you just said proves he's willing to change his philosophy? If they weren't drafted by Ted, then he don't want em..your missing the POINT because your stuck in your hole lol climb out dude
 

Spanish Rose

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
430
Reaction score
15
Oh, and you're wrong about nobody understanding AND . . . using 'your' incorrectly.


It seemed simple and obvious to me also.
Haha really? Well I know I won that argument bro man.. You defeated yourself with a comeback like that because, like I said, your missing THE point my man.. I've done this at a higher level than you have and probably ever will.. Let the big boys talk
 

AmishMafia

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
7,270
Reaction score
2,387
Location
PENDING
Haha really? Well I know I won that argument bro man.. You defeated yourself with a comeback like that because, like I said, your missing THE point my man.. I've done this at a higher level then you have and probably ever will.. Let the big boys talk

:rolleyes: ok. whatever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Latest posts

Top