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

Rip on TT and MM in here

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by wischeez, Oct 6, 2008.

  1. ksios

    ksios Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree that peppers would be a great fit. I don't think that the Packers will be able to afford him if Carolina slaps a tag on him. By the way I was only a "little sarcastic in that one post" lol!! ;) . I have never been a TT fan since he took over as Gm. I do like MM as a coach though. In this thread you have people who are on both sides of the fence, each have data to support their opinion. TT didn't sign so and so (bad), TT signed so and so (good). the point to all this dribble is that one can manipulate data to support their side. If you read some of the post (maybe even one of mine???) we tend to call out the other's opinion as one person wrote"idiocy". I don't think we should get to calling other peoples opinions as "idiocy". That's why I tend to write some of the comments I do. We all love the Pack and want them to be winners all the time. Otherwise we wouldn't be on this site being so passionate.
     
  2. doughsellz

    doughsellz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    301
    Ratings:
    +2
    The defensive coaching & scheme from '08 was almost exactly the same as '07. Does Sanders get both credit & scorn for getting results in '07 & not in '08? Make up your mind. This defensive upheaval is a knee-jerk reaction by MM to the poor team effort of the D in '08. With a healthy Jenkins & Barnett for the entire season this shake-up of the D never happens.

    If the 3-4 was a "better scheme" then all 32 teams would use it. Jim Bates turned GB's D around in one season ('05) & he did it without changing to the 3-4. He did it with style & intensity. He didn't need a different defensive philosophy. He just convinced the players that their own abilities were sufficient for success, they just needed to play as a unit instead of 11 individuals.

    This change to the 3-4 reeks of desperation on MM's account. The 3-4 is not some miracle designed to save this team. It is just another experiment aimed at appeasing a disgruntled fanbase.

    If MM really wanted to make a statement he could have proclaimed the facts: this past season's defensive effort was purely heartless when it mattered most. That's not the fault of coaching. It lays at the feet of individual players who failed at gut-check time. MM could have declared Sanders his guy through thick or thin & demanded more from where it matters most - player effort.

    That would have been a more respectable turn of events. Starting over from scratch is MM's last-ditch attempt to save his own job. Good Luck.
     
  3. doughsellz

    doughsellz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    301
    Ratings:
    +2
    57-39

    That was the "ruin" Mike Sherman left upon the Packers. Even with the 4-12 debacle in '05 factored in, perpetrated by the new GM with aspirations of finding his own guy to coach.

    Even the 3 seasons he spent as Coach-GM rank higher than TT's first 3 seasons- in the category that counts most - wins. And he was doing MM's job in addition to TT's during that span.

    '02-'04 32-16

    '05-'07 25-23

    The biggest drop-off in wins from one season to the next in Packers history - that is the legacy of the '08 Packers, presided over by TT.

    Say what you will about the abilities of Mike Sherman. He found arguably the two best defensive lineman the Packers currently employ (Kampman, Jenkins) the best LB (Barnett) & the best CB (Harris).

    The area where we all can agree that Sherman was the worst as Packers' GM was with the $$$. He was careless, borderline reckless.

    In his defense, he was under the impression (because every pundit in the state of WI declared it every season) that GB was only a player or two away from another SB appearance.

    We all were convinced that with the NAME under center we were going to compete for NFL supremacy every year.

    That is why Sherman traded up a lot, attmepting to find that certain player that was going to push the team over the top.

    I pose this question to you - if TT is so much better than Sherman, why aren't the victories piling up?

    To you, LongTimeFan -

    TT does favor his own acqusitions. The proof is out there. You choose to ignore it.

    Mike McCarthy is the perfect example. Corey Williams is too. So is Rodgers. So is Marquand Manuel, declared "the QB of the D" in '06 by TT, instead of Mark Roman who had a sub-par '05 compared to '04 but was more experienced than Manuel.

    That Sherman, Williams & Roman didn't excel with their new teams is irrelevant to the Packers. They were great fits in GB. TT didn't care, he just wanted his own guys. Period.
     
  4. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    I hear ya on the Sherman record..He produced wins but my theory is that lot of coaches could have done just as good as him with the talent that those rosters had....He also had the luxury of being in the worse division in football..in 6 years, a team could have won the division with a record of 9-7 3 times...The Packers were beating up on the lower teams in the North for 5 wins a year


    When it came to beating better than average teams they just couldnt do it on a consistent basis ( mostly playoffs) that is why they were one and done during his time here

    how many on those teams were drafted or signed by Sherman? And how many were left over from the Wolf era?

    My point is that the majority of the roster (meaning 75% or so ) I am almost sure they were left overs and in their prime from Wolf..

    As they got older Mike was not able to replace them with same talent level..Which is what we saw as years went on...







    Go back and look at some of the additions that he kept on and on and on
     
  5. greenbaypacker80

    greenbaypacker80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Messages:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree with dough. I thought Sherman got a raw deal from TT. We were headed in the right direction Bates first year as DC. Though we were 4-12, we only lost 1 game badly. If I recall right, most of losses were 4 points or less. Somehow I get the feeling TT didn't like Sherman that much. I just found it amusing how TT wanted to keep Bates as DC but change the headcoach.
     
  6. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    Wow,

    looked like you were describing 2008 season there for a minute

    :lol:
     
  7. greenbaypacker80

    greenbaypacker80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Messages:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    true, we didn't lose many games this year by alot. I still feel this DC change will be better. I didn't feel Sherman should have lost his job, especially all the good years he gave us. With Bates as DC also, looked like we were headed in right direction on D. TT reaffirmed that by wanting to keep Bates as DC.
     
  8. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    I hate the argument that in 2005 the D was ranted #1 or what ever it was..its a LIE for total defense..


    you are aware that the D with Bates was not as good as it appeared?

    Yes they were ranked #1 in PASSING, thats cuz teams were not passing on them..

    Why pass on them when you can run it down their throat

    10th in toal rushing yards allowed..This year 7th in rushing yards allowed

    13th in total points allowed....This year they were 9th in total scoring allowed


    Those stats do not indicate a top defense at all

    Check this out
     
  9. greenbaypacker80

    greenbaypacker80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Messages:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    I am not sure where any of the defenses ranked in past. The thing with Bates was the progress. Not sure if the year before Bates was the Slowick experiment. I remember how Slowick failed miserably the one year. I think Bates was following year. Not sure if Sherman should have fired Donatell either, I thought Donatell did a good job.
     
  10. ksios

    ksios Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hey longtime, your stats comparing the defenses from 95 and this year are very interesting. To me it looks like we had a better defense this year than 95. We all know the win/loss comparisons between the two years. were the other teams that bad in 95 (of course detroit was 0-16 this year) or is the difference between the two teams a player or two that are missing. I find it hard to believe that the recievers were better in 95. Jennings is a premier player. I'll give you the tight end was a lot better in 95. running back? we all know about who was qb(don't want to go there), or maybe it was the difference in coaching. I think the team in 95 (although with all the beers I drank from 95-09 my mind might be mush) played with more fire on both sides of the ball. To me that goes to the coach, it is his responsibility to lead with emotion. although there were a few times I saw emotion from coach, most of the time he looked like a statue out there IMO. I am very interested in your take, I don't want to hear about Favre be the difference, unless that is the only reason for the record this year ( which everybody knows isn't the reason).
     
  11. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977

    I think you mean 05?

    but to compare 05 to 08 receivers is stupid..

    that has nothing to do with the claim that the D in 05 was top ranked

    my point was that in scoring the D was WORSE this year then the D was in 05..And 05 was a bad year
     
  12. greenbaypacker80

    greenbaypacker80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Messages:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    I didn't realize our D in 05 was ranked that high. Do any of you guys know what we were ranked in 07 when we were 13-3? I was just curious because I don't how high we were that year.
     
  13. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,217
    Ratings:
    +626
    This is true. The Packers passing defense was ranked #1 in 2005 because they were close to dead last in rush defense. That year, teams got big leads early and simply pounded the ball the entire second half to run down the clock. Rankings like that are meaningless. You need to focus on TOTAL DEFENSE.
     
  14. ksios

    ksios Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +0
    My bad I miss read the dates being compared. The 2005 team couldn't stop anybody that had a decent run game.
     
  15. packerbacker23

    packerbacker23 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2009
    Messages:
    5
    Ratings:
    +0
    if tt doesnt draft ryan orakpo he is an idiot.he willproly blow it and draft maybin or some other high"potential" guy that will miss,just like harrell, but if your not sure check this clip out. i wasnt sure who i wanted him to draft untl o saw this and i really hope hes here at 9 check this out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGUc3UL64f0
     
  16. doughsellz

    doughsellz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    301
    Ratings:
    +2

    Tony Mandarich was a legend in the weight room as well.
     
  17. hitking2456

    hitking2456 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Messages:
    34
    Ratings:
    +0
    Honestly, I read all this pandering about Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy, and I feel like it is unwarranted. When you look at this team and the talent it has, the sky is the limit. I get tired of all the crying about the free agents. People throw big money at guys and then their production drops off. Give them a chance. How much has this team changed since 13-3? Favre left, and Rodgers played far beyond anyone's expectations, and the defense has kept the same players minus Corey Williams. The only difference is that we have a new D-coach and a couple of assistants who are ready to take care of business. With one or two key additions in free agency, this year will be a Super Bowl or bust in my opinion.
     
  18. flyguy4ever4

    flyguy4ever4 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Messages:
    32
    Ratings:
    +0
    I miss the days when the GB packers were somewhat relevant at least in the national media. Watch espn and nfl network all the time and nobody ever even hardly mentions GB. Doesn't seem like anybody is beating down Thompson or McCarthy's door for insight or interviews. To me this year is do or die for the dynamic duo, put up or shut up and get out of town time.
     
  19. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    I agree Fly they need to show a HUGE leap from last year for them to stay
     
  20. carol k

    carol k Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    592
    Ratings:
    +0

    I noticed that too--very little mention of GB any more. Hope that TT and M&M get with it this year, and at least take our beloved Packers into the playoffs.
     
  21. ksios

    ksios Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +0
    I also agree that the media has forgotten about GB. I think that is because of the NAME leaving for another team. That and a 4-12 season maybe a reason. The media always was interested in the Pack when the NAME and Reggie White were here. I think that if Rogers has a good season and the Pack goes deeper than one and done in the playoffs, I think the media will be back looking at the Pack. They may be back talking about the dismissal of TT and MM if we have another season like last year. I don't think this will be the season of the Pack going deep into the playoffs because it will take time for the defense to click. We will need the offense to carry the team until that happens and as the record shows the offense couldn't carry this team. The defense gave up too many points for the offense to score. I do how ever believe that if the team's players stick with it, the Pack in '10 will be a team to be feared once more. Go ahead and talk amongst yourselves.
     
  22. Pugger

    Pugger Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    414
    Ratings:
    +5
    I don't get all worked up about the Pack not getting any love and attention from the national media folks. That's okay. Maybe now with the NAME retired some of our other good players will get some attention once the season starts. Of course the TEAM has to perform better and win those close games next season. Then we'd have the BSPNs of the world talking about the Pack once again. :)
     
  23. kevo221

    kevo221 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    Ted Thompson, you do not get anything for hoarding your money. Before free agency the Packers had the 5th most cap space behind Tampa Bay, Kansas City, Philadelphia, and Denver. However Tampa Bay, Kansas City, and Denver have all went out and got players to help the team (Winslow, Cassel, and Dawkins). If you have 34 million that you are sitting on, you are wasting the money, plain and simple. You would notice that the teams that are low on cap space are successful in the NFl. The 4 teams with the least space are Carolina, New England, Indianapolis, and
    Pittsburgh who combined had a record of 47-17, the MVP of the league, and the Super Bowl championship. Saving is not helping.
     
  24. GreenBayCracker

    GreenBayCracker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2009
    Messages:
    73
    Ratings:
    +2
    This.
     
  25. Spanish Rose

    Spanish Rose Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    430
    Ratings:
    +61
    this x2 about time someone said it...
     

Share This Page