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
Packers contract negotiation stories
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="HardRightEdge" data-source="post: 563653"><p>"Best value available" is amorphous and requires some considerable unpacking, and I've found your attempts at it to be not entirely satisfying.</p><p></p><p>To reiterate, the way I view the Rodgers pick is the need preceded the opportunity. Coming up with a succession plan for a 35 year old franchise QB several years removed from his best seasons, who was noodling about retirement, and who frustrated the planning process should be perceived as the paramount long term need for the organization.</p><p></p><p>After that, it is a matter of seizing an opportunity when it arises. The opportunity arose with Rodgers. If he turned out to be flop during the heir-in-waiting development process, the next opportunity would be sought. That Rodgers turned out to be a fabulous success at just the right moment, after 3 years in development, doesn't diminish the need component in that pick.</p><p></p><p>I think more of Thompson (less disappointment in him and in being "wrong" about him based on Brandt's earlier comments) after reading these more current comments about the negotiation.</p><p></p><p>The idea that Brandt would be thinking one way about the uncertainties in how long Favre would play while Thompson would be blind to the risks strains credulity. The more plausible thinking would be that Thompson does not say what he actually thinks, unless one wants to believe his thinking is confined to the luke warm cliches in his public comments year end and year out.</p><p></p><p>Regardless, looking at the most recent drafts (and there are more examples in earlier years) we see high picks going to positions of high need. In fact, they fill consensus perceptions of need among writers and fans alike.</p><p></p><p>Sherrod (Clifton successor), Perry (bookend after the Walden/Zombo failed reprieve), Boyd (Capers: "We need more length" and the hole unsatisfactorily filled after the Jenkins departure), Dix (disastrous safety play). Even Adams...#1 and #2 unsigned in their contract years at the time.</p><p></p><p>All the evidence points to Thompson viewing need about like everybody else.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HardRightEdge, post: 563653"] "Best value available" is amorphous and requires some considerable unpacking, and I've found your attempts at it to be not entirely satisfying. To reiterate, the way I view the Rodgers pick is the need preceded the opportunity. Coming up with a succession plan for a 35 year old franchise QB several years removed from his best seasons, who was noodling about retirement, and who frustrated the planning process should be perceived as the paramount long term need for the organization. After that, it is a matter of seizing an opportunity when it arises. The opportunity arose with Rodgers. If he turned out to be flop during the heir-in-waiting development process, the next opportunity would be sought. That Rodgers turned out to be a fabulous success at just the right moment, after 3 years in development, doesn't diminish the need component in that pick. I think more of Thompson (less disappointment in him and in being "wrong" about him based on Brandt's earlier comments) after reading these more current comments about the negotiation. The idea that Brandt would be thinking one way about the uncertainties in how long Favre would play while Thompson would be blind to the risks strains credulity. The more plausible thinking would be that Thompson does not say what he actually thinks, unless one wants to believe his thinking is confined to the luke warm cliches in his public comments year end and year out. Regardless, looking at the most recent drafts (and there are more examples in earlier years) we see high picks going to positions of high need. In fact, they fill consensus perceptions of need among writers and fans alike. Sherrod (Clifton successor), Perry (bookend after the Walden/Zombo failed reprieve), Boyd (Capers: "We need more length" and the hole unsatisfactorily filled after the Jenkins departure), Dix (disastrous safety play). Even Adams...#1 and #2 unsigned in their contract years at the time. All the evidence points to Thompson viewing need about like everybody else. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
CarryTheG14
monte smith
Magooch
shockerx
mradtke66
Latest posts
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: SudsMcBucky
32 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: OldSchool101
Today at 11:15 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2026 Roster Thread - Semi-Live
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 10:43 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: OldSchool101
Today at 9:26 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Badgers Football 2025-2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 8:57 AM
Wisconsin Badgers Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers contract negotiation stories
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
