Just because the colts moved up to get Tony Ugoh and he did not work out, doesn't mean jack. Half the players picked in the 1st round don't live up to the hype. Its a crap shoot and you know it. I didn't say move up to get anyone. If we have a OT or OG ranked 29 on our board and a receiver ranked 28 for example, does 1 slot make that much of a difference? Hell no. If you think TT doesn't reach for players look at our second round pick last year. He seems to be a solid pick but he was a reach for sure!
OT/G at #32
- Thread starter GBPack2010
- Start date
Just because the colts moved up to get Tony Ugoh and he did not work out, doesn't mean jack. Half the players picked in the 1st round don't live up to the hype. Its a crap shoot and you know it. I didn't say move up to get anyone. If we have a OT or OG ranked 29 on our board and a receiver ranked 28 for example, does 1 slot make that much of a difference? Hell no. If you think TT doesn't reach for players look at our second round pick last year. He seems to be a solid pick but he was a reach for sure!
TJV
Lifelong Packers Fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2011
- Messages
- 5,389
- Reaction score
- 954
Of course if a group of players are rated nearly the same, Thompson will pick the one that fills the greatest need. But that’s a far cry from…
The Press Gazette had a story quoting Rob Rang about OTs after the first five who are likely to be gone by pick #32. He rates James Carpenter, Orlando Franklin, Marcus Cannon, Marcus Gilbert, and Nate Brewer as 2nd to 3rd rounders. Behind them he lists Ben Ijalana, Derek Newton, Jah Reid, Willie Smith, Byron Stingily, and Byron Bell.
If the top five are gone and Thompson doesn’t move up to get one of them, it makes much more sense to pick the best player on the Packers’ board with that pick and pick up one of the above later in the draft. Same with OG – unless there’s an OG at or very near the top of their board at #32 and at #64, it would be foolish, and against Thompson’s MO to pick one.
The Press Gazette had a story quoting Rob Rang about OTs after the first five who are likely to be gone by pick #32. He rates James Carpenter, Orlando Franklin, Marcus Cannon, Marcus Gilbert, and Nate Brewer as 2nd to 3rd rounders. Behind them he lists Ben Ijalana, Derek Newton, Jah Reid, Willie Smith, Byron Stingily, and Byron Bell.
If the top five are gone and Thompson doesn’t move up to get one of them, it makes much more sense to pick the best player on the Packers’ board with that pick and pick up one of the above later in the draft. Same with OG – unless there’s an OG at or very near the top of their board at #32 and at #64, it would be foolish, and against Thompson’s MO to pick one.
PackersRS
Cheesehead
"Half the players in the 1st round don't live up to the hype.". Right. WHEN THE IDIOT GM REACHES FOR THE PLAYER!
TT has missed on ONE 1st rounder while sticking to his philosophy, while striking gold with 5.
About Neal being a reach, no he wasn't. Not on TT's board. You are mistaking reaching with internet analysis. Clay Matthews was a 2nd rounder on most internet boards, but he was a top 15 player on TT's. It's the same with Harrell. He wasn't a reach for TT. He was wrong in grading him the way he did, but it doesn't matter. But I take you were mad with Neal's decision, right? Possibly cursing TT?
As for player slotted 29 and 28, that's not how players are graded. They're atributed grades like 7.0, 6.8, etc... And rounds, a player is a 1st rounder, a top 10, etc... But there aren't 32 first rounders in their board, not all drafts.
What we're discussing here is draft philosophies. Mine, and TT's, have resulted in a SB, and many more to come. I think, but I could be wrong in here, that it's the right philosophy.
But I could be wrong. Who will be the best LT in FA? We should target him and dump loads of money in his lap...
PackersRS
Cheesehead
EXACTLY!!!!!
Choosing for need if 2 players are rated similarly = sound, intelligent choice.
Sticking to needs regardless of value = Matt Millen.
1 billion people said Neal was a reach and you and TT said he wasn't. You guys were right. lol. We can't grade the guy until he plays for awhile on a consistant basis. As far as me being mad about drafting Neal.....? No I was not. I gathered a bit more information on him and was satisfied to a certain extent.
I threw the slotted example.......as an example so anyone could understand what I was talking about. I know how the players are graded.
As far as Harrell is concerned. Anyone that thinks he shouldn't be arrested for using valuable space on our roster and air on our planet.......well.......you know where I am going with that.....so I'll be nice.
Oh......and come on PackersRS, I know you are a moderater in all........but you make it sound like you and TT think exactly alike and we all should thank you and your philosophy for winning the Superbowl for us.
Its not TT Philosophy that won us the Superbowl. Its not the Coaches that won it for us either. Its not the players. Its everything combined.
I am not trying to argue with you. I am just making my opinion known.
One last thing. Where did the FA OT thing come from? I never said anything about that.
PackersRS
Cheesehead
I wasn't right. I thought he would be a reach. I didn't like the pick then. That's not the point. I didn't know enough. TT did. In his evaluation (the team's evaluation), they ranked Neal as a 2nd rounder. And, by the little he has shown, they were right and everyone else was wrong.
First of all, let me say this. When I'm discussing a topic, I'm a poster. That's it. I abide by the same rules everyone else does. What I say is my opinion and my opinion alone, absolutely not influenced by me being a mod. If you doubt that, go check my posts from early 2009, before I was made a mod.
Now, no, I don't agree with him all the time and there's plenty of proof in this forum that I've complained plenty of times.
But I do agree wholeheartedly with his core philosophy, and it has been proven right by the SB win and the way we won, with so many backups playing huge parts, and with a team build almost exclusively through the draft.
Players and coaches that he himself assembled, according to his philosophy.
TT is the first to say that he's not the sole responsible. They asked him in his latest presser what was his secret, and he humbly diverged it, saying that it was all the players and coaches.
We all know that anything we say isn't gonna change the course the Packers take. Noone on the staff spends reading online forums. Check this out: NFL Videos: Packers' draft strategy
Casserly said the Packers' brass spent 17 days together looking at 3 games for every single player that every scout has graded drafteable. It's clear that they have absolutely no time to do anything other than prepare for the draft.
The FA mentality is the same one about drafting for needs. It's one way to build a team, to build it for now. But IMHO it's wrong, because you can't predict what's gonna be the team's needs even in the next season! Who would've thought we would need that many DL depth this season? We thought our DL was set with Jenkins Raji Pickett and Jolly. But **** happens.
LT may seem like a need now, but Newhouse could prove to be the tackle of the future. And what if something happens to Raji, and we're stuck with just Pickett as the NT for the whole year?
We look like set at WR, but if Jones leaves, and Driver plays below his standards, we're left with only 2 capable receivers. We no longer can run our 4 and 5 wr sets, even with Finley coming back.
TT has built this team by adquiring the best player available in his board. It has worked. I wish that he will stick with it. In essence, that's it.
aaronqb
Cheesehead
- Joined
- May 6, 2010
- Messages
- 582
- Reaction score
- 73
How can you sit here and say you are a TT supporter when you were calling for MM's head even after they had made the playoffs after the Bear game? Give me a break!! Please don't pat yourself on the back for being lockstep with TT when you were at odds with his most important hire and most important staff member. It's insulting to those of us who supported TT and MM throughout the season.
Here's a few of your posts if you need reminding (and I'm out for the next few months) ...
============================================================================================
http://www.packerforum.com/f8/so-mm-still-fired-25367.html
Just before the Bear game to get into the playoffs ...
Answer these questions
#1) play calling better?
#2) did they keep the pedal to the floor entire game?
#3) will the people that wanted him fired, shut up about firing him?
1) Absolutely. But it helps that it's working. We're being able to run decently, and Rodgers and Flynn played really well. When things go as planned, MM is a great playcaller. Still needs to see when the running game doesn't perform, if he's able to adjust.
2) Yes they did, both games. Some players are making some dumb mistakes (Jordy, JJ, Woodson), but it's nowhere near MM's fault.
3) I still want him fired, because, like I said, I still need to see him answer my doubts, about a close game, about adjusting when things don't go well.
Well, I don't want him fired no matter what. Don't think I ever did. I really hope that those areas where he shows inneptitude are corrected, and that we win the SB with him. He's probably the best QB coach in the league, Rodgers is a great product of his system, and it would take a while to implement a new system. Plus, the players seem to really respect him.
I just don't think we can achieve our full potential with MM coaching. But I hope I'm wrong.
And after the Bear game when they had made the playoffs ..
A wildcard spot is good enough for you? I want more.
Do you like seeing the O come unprepared and unable to move the ball despite all the talent?
Why does the D keep winning us games with guys like Sam Shields, Charlie Peprah, Howard Green and Eric Walden?
I'm trying to look past the record, look at why we win and lose games. I'm not satisfied with McCarthy. His playcalling has been much better the last weeks (though still lacking. My mother yelled Kuhn handoff on that first and goal). And there are some really incompetent coaches on this team that keep hindering us back.
But if you don't want to anylize anything and just cheer, be my guest. But don't rebute what I question with simple "we won" or "we're injuried" answers. I know you can bring more than that.
PackersRS
Cheesehead
You are leaving NOW? I mean, you don't post over a decade, and goes back just to pick on me? Are you stalking me? Should I be flattered if so?
So what about THIS post? http://www.packerforum.com/f8/so-mm-still-fired-25367-18.html#post324087
Yeah, I was clearly bashing MM... :icon_rolleyes:
And how about this thread?
http://www.packerforum.com/f8/gms-philosophies-19785.html
CLEARLY, a TT hater...
I did want MM fired, it's not a secret. I stated the reasons, I was wrong. He changed his ways in the playoffs, and I admitted such. That doesn't mean I wasn't behind TT. I did question some of his decisions, I said so myself in this same thread.
I still stand that the problems I listed were very real, and that with them, we wouldn't have won the SB.
But I admit that he shouldn't have been fired. Obviously, TT knew him much better, and was confident that, when it mattered, MM was going to get the job done.
Admitting. You know, that thing when rational people are able to see mistakes.
But for extremist lunatics, it's kinda hard to do that. Those people think that if you don't follow them or their faith blindly, you are against them. You know, those people that go on a rant against everyone that thought differently, and that stalk others...
No, but I'm pretty sure that being absent for 3 MONTHS and coming back just to meddle into something you were not called upon is perfectly normal and sane.
You take care of yourself.
TJV
Lifelong Packers Fanatic
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2011
- Messages
- 5,389
- Reaction score
- 954
IMO some fans misunderstand Thompson’s philosophy of selecting BPA. If Thompson, or any GM, blindly adhered to that philosophy, he could find himself drafting 5 players at the same position because in each of those selections the team could have players playing that one position rated 0.01 ahead of the other players available. So no GM uses a purely BPA approach and they shouldn't. The essence of Thompson’s philosophy IMO is not to reach as turbo69 suggests he should do in the upcoming draft. And it involves setting up the board with current players on the roster and therefore the team’s needs in mind.
A recent article in the jsonline quotes Thompson as saying, "We go by the way the value board is set up and our draft board is set up. And we try to do that openly and honestly," said Thompson. "If there are what we would perceive as needs, that position might get a little more extra care. But we still believe drafting the best player on the board is the best policy. You don't know what your needs are going to be. You might think you have a need at the end of April or you may think you have a strong position at the end of April, but you don't know where that's going to be come Aug. 1, as we found out this season."
That philosophy led the selection of Aaron Rodgers. This is just my opinion: At the time QB was not a top need for the team, and wasn’t even in the top 3. However, Rodgers was clearly on the talent tier above the others available so even if the Packers’ ratings of a couple of players at positions of need were enhanced, they still weren’t close to how the Packers rated Rodgers, who was probably rated by Thompson and his staff as a top 10 or 15 player. Thompson’s philosophy made him select Rodgers.
Only those who saw the Packers’ board before last years’ draft know for certain whether or not Neal was a reach. Like everyone reading this, I didn’t see the board but I don’t believe it was a reach for a couple of reasons. First, because I’ve witnessed all of Thompson’s drafts as GM and it’s apparent to me he adheres to the BPA philosophy, as described above, as stringently as any GM I’ve seen, even more so than Ron Wolf. Second look at that draft. As I remember it, many “experts” and mock drafters had Morgan Burnett being selected ahead of Mike Neal and that led them to believe the Neal pick was a reach. If Thompson had those players rated like the “experts”, why wouldn’t he have selected Burnett at pick #56? To me those two picks make it clear Neal was the higher rated player on the Packers’ board and that Thompson and staff differed with the “experts” in evaluating Neal.
We didn’t see enough of Neal last season but from what I saw I was impressed. I believe he arrived as the strongest player on the roster as measured in the weight room. If he stays healthy I think he’s almost perfectly suited to play DE in Capers’ scheme and the ideal candidate to team with Raji when Capers uses only two DL.
The danger if Thompson reaches is he may acquire an OL who is mediocre and passes up a WR, for example, who may end up emulating Jennings. Or an OLB who is better than Jones/Zombo/Walden by a significant margin. Or a CB who will team up with Williams and Shields for the next several years. The draft is indeed a crapshoot but because of the way Thompson conducts his draft, it’s less of a crapshoot for the Packers than it is for many other teams. I recently saw someone allege that Thompson is the only GM who can boast every one of his draft picks since the 2007 draft is still in the league. I don’t know if that’s true or not but I do know Thompson has drafted quality and quantity among the best in the league. Last season winning the Super Bowl with 15 or 16 players on IR proved that point IMO.
Finally, it was Thompson’s philosophy that led to the Packers winning the Super Bowl. Because Thompson was responsible for the coaches and the acquisition and retention of the players. IOW, he was and is ultimately responsible for everything combined. As we all know, his title is Executive Vice President, General Manager and Director of (ALL) Football Operations. Of course every employee of the team contributed but Thompson deserves most of the credit as the captain of the ship.
A recent article in the jsonline quotes Thompson as saying, "We go by the way the value board is set up and our draft board is set up. And we try to do that openly and honestly," said Thompson. "If there are what we would perceive as needs, that position might get a little more extra care. But we still believe drafting the best player on the board is the best policy. You don't know what your needs are going to be. You might think you have a need at the end of April or you may think you have a strong position at the end of April, but you don't know where that's going to be come Aug. 1, as we found out this season."
That philosophy led the selection of Aaron Rodgers. This is just my opinion: At the time QB was not a top need for the team, and wasn’t even in the top 3. However, Rodgers was clearly on the talent tier above the others available so even if the Packers’ ratings of a couple of players at positions of need were enhanced, they still weren’t close to how the Packers rated Rodgers, who was probably rated by Thompson and his staff as a top 10 or 15 player. Thompson’s philosophy made him select Rodgers.
Only those who saw the Packers’ board before last years’ draft know for certain whether or not Neal was a reach. Like everyone reading this, I didn’t see the board but I don’t believe it was a reach for a couple of reasons. First, because I’ve witnessed all of Thompson’s drafts as GM and it’s apparent to me he adheres to the BPA philosophy, as described above, as stringently as any GM I’ve seen, even more so than Ron Wolf. Second look at that draft. As I remember it, many “experts” and mock drafters had Morgan Burnett being selected ahead of Mike Neal and that led them to believe the Neal pick was a reach. If Thompson had those players rated like the “experts”, why wouldn’t he have selected Burnett at pick #56? To me those two picks make it clear Neal was the higher rated player on the Packers’ board and that Thompson and staff differed with the “experts” in evaluating Neal.
We didn’t see enough of Neal last season but from what I saw I was impressed. I believe he arrived as the strongest player on the roster as measured in the weight room. If he stays healthy I think he’s almost perfectly suited to play DE in Capers’ scheme and the ideal candidate to team with Raji when Capers uses only two DL.
The danger if Thompson reaches is he may acquire an OL who is mediocre and passes up a WR, for example, who may end up emulating Jennings. Or an OLB who is better than Jones/Zombo/Walden by a significant margin. Or a CB who will team up with Williams and Shields for the next several years. The draft is indeed a crapshoot but because of the way Thompson conducts his draft, it’s less of a crapshoot for the Packers than it is for many other teams. I recently saw someone allege that Thompson is the only GM who can boast every one of his draft picks since the 2007 draft is still in the league. I don’t know if that’s true or not but I do know Thompson has drafted quality and quantity among the best in the league. Last season winning the Super Bowl with 15 or 16 players on IR proved that point IMO.
Finally, it was Thompson’s philosophy that led to the Packers winning the Super Bowl. Because Thompson was responsible for the coaches and the acquisition and retention of the players. IOW, he was and is ultimately responsible for everything combined. As we all know, his title is Executive Vice President, General Manager and Director of (ALL) Football Operations. Of course every employee of the team contributed but Thompson deserves most of the credit as the captain of the ship.
