Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Draft Talk
2011 Draft Archive
OT/G at #32
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TJV" data-source="post: 358114" data-attributes="member: 4300"><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">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. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">A recent <a href="http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/120427634.html" target="_blank">article</a> in the jsonline quotes Thompson as saying, </span><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">"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. "<em>If there are what we would perceive as needs, that position might get a little more extra care</em>. 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."</span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">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 <em>enhanced</em>, 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 <em>made</em> him select Rodgers. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">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. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">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. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">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. </span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">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 <em>everything combined</em>. As we all know, his title is </span><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">Executive Vice President, General Manager and <em>Director of </em>(ALL)<em> Football Operations</em></span><span style="font-family: 'Verdana'">. Of course every employee of the team contributed but Thompson deserves most of the credit as the captain of the ship. </span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TJV, post: 358114, member: 4300"] [FONT=Verdana]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. [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]A recent [URL="http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/120427634.html"]article[/URL] in the jsonline quotes Thompson as saying, [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]"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. "[I]If there are what we would perceive as needs, that position might get a little more extra care[/I]. 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."[/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]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 [I]enhanced[/I], 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 [I]made[/I] him select Rodgers. [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]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. [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]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. [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]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. [/FONT] [FONT=Verdana]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 [I]everything combined[/I]. As we all know, his title is [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Executive Vice President, General Manager and [I]Director of [/I](ALL)[I] Football Operations[/I][/FONT][FONT=Verdana]. Of course every employee of the team contributed but Thompson deserves most of the credit as the captain of the ship. [/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
P
The Crew - 2026
Latest: Pugger
18 minutes ago
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
M
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: mradtke66
18 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: CarryTheG14
Today at 9:27 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: Curly Calhoun
Today at 8:28 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 11:14 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Draft Talk
2011 Draft Archive
OT/G at #32
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
