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. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    About Olshansky, he didn't play well last year. He has character issues, and he wanted a more lucrative contract, but the fact is last year was the only he didn't play well...

    Now about the re-signing. I WOULD agree, but when you re-sign Bush for $1M and you re-sign Montgomery, you're WASTING money and cap space, therefore you CANNOT use that argument. If we let go all those bad players, we can sign one good FA. But if you keep re-signing those, it's obvious you'll only have cap space to re-sign your own...
     
  2. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    how much is it going to take to re-sign Jennings?
     
  3. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    Jennings is a team player. That's not to say he doesn't want the money, but for sure he wouldn't mind us getting a player that would improve our team. And by signing Bush, it doesn't help the chances of re-signing Jennings.
    But the receiver that's hurting our cap space isn't Jennings. Driver is 34, and demands aprox. $6M in cap space. We need to reform his contract. Or let him go. Personally, I would love him to retire as a Packer, giving him a 3year deal with less money. He's also team player, but he needs to agree...
     
  4. ksios

    ksios Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +0
    the Packers are projected, and I use the term projected loosely to have $18 million under the cap. If Jennings takes $7mil a year to sign, we still have $11 million to play with, I think with that kind of room we probably could have splashed in the fee agent market a little. I am still looking around to see who is going to be a fee agent in 2010. do any of you guys know where I can find that info easily?

    Thanks
     
  5. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    How much for drafted players? I say at least 4 million

    Jennings I think is getting 10 million, but thats just me


    http://www.kffl.com/static/nfl/features/freeagents/fa.php?option=By+Team&y=2010

    I think this list is right


    Greg Jennings
    Daryn Colledge
    Chad Clifton
    Tony Moll
    Jason Spitz
    Aaron Kampman
    Johnny Jolly
    Ryan Pickett
    Will Blackmon
    Atari Bigby
    Charlie Peprah
    Nick Collins
     
  6. ksios

    ksios Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +0
    thanks for the list, how many of those guys do you think the Pack really need to sign. I say Jennings,Kampman,Bigby,Spitz. This could be an interesting year for Kampman, new defensive style. I believe he can make the transition to the 3-4, if not maybe could use him as trade bait. Obviously we need Jennings, I think Bigby is worth signing in the secondary. I believe Spitz is very versitile, the rest of the OL would be a luxury, but not necessary a must. I know they have for the most part played together for a while, but at some point we need to start replacing. I think we should start sooner than later because Rodgers is very mobile right now and would be able to get out of a few jams while the line learns how to play together. If they wait to long, Aaron could lose a little of the mobility and that could be bad. I find it very interesting how many OL are on that list in one year. Somebody wasn't thinking, I would think you would try to stagger the contracts so that this wouldn't happen. With so many OL due at the same time, they kind of have a hand up over the Pack. One could make the argument that since so many are due, that they all could demand more money because if they all left then Pack would be without many of the veteran OL. There is strength in numbers. what's your thoughts?
     
  7. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    well Spitz, Moll and Colledge were ALL drafted in 2006....so not sure how it was someone not thinking?

    They still have this year to re-sign those 3 if they want to...I want that OL to be mean and nasty but I do not think with the current group it wont happen..So I think they will take a long hard look as season goes on and decide who is going to stay.

    4 years should be more than enough time to get a gauge on a player.


    As far as the rest? Better make damn sure they can play in the 3-4 before even ATTEMPTING to re-sign..

    I expect NOTHING to happen up until at least half way through the season on any re-signing of a defensive player
     
  8. doughsellz

    doughsellz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    301
    Ratings:
    +2
    I guess we're finding out firsthand why a sudden youth movement wasn't such a good idea. Too many players all hitting the open market at the same time.

    Too many 4-year deals too. How does a guy like Kampman, an '02 draft pick, hit the open market twice in 8 years? As outstanding as he is shouldn't the re-signing have been at least a 5-year commitment? A long-term deal?

    Kampman may just decide he's not interested in the growing pains of a switch to the 3-4. He'll probably try to get a long-term deal elsewhere playing for a 4-3 defense. I wouldn't be surprised if TT was shopping him for a trade right now.
     
  9. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    please dont blame Ted on the length of deals..that was on Andrew Brandts lap
     
  10. ksios

    ksios Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    31
    Ratings:
    +0
    Longtime I totally agree with your comments about players being able to play in a 3-4 before we sign to long term contracts. AMEN brother.I think if they plan on signing the OL trio, they should sign them for different amount of years to start staggering when the contract comes up.does TT have any say on how long he wants a player's contract to be? The reason I said someone wasn't thinking is because they should have staggered the contracts between 2-4 years depending on who the team believed was the best prospect obviously would get the 4 year and the one that the team deams the most expendable would get the two year. I didn't realize that Ted didn't set up the contract lengths, I supposed that's why there are "Cap specialist" to manage that. I don't think anybody should argue the point that having almost your entire OL come due at the same time is not a good idea. It gives the players more of an advantage IMHO, to bargain for bigger contracts if the threat of most of the OL leaving the organization. I do believe that the packer players are team players at a high level, but lets be honest, it is a business on both sides of the fence and everybody is looking out for #1. I know Brett restructured his contract to help the team, and I'm sure there have been more. These are the exception rather than the rule. No different than a team using what ever they can to keep contracts as low as possible. I like the changes in philosophy on defense. I also agree with doughsellz that Kampman may decide he doesn't like the 3-4 or that maybe he can't play in that type of system. If that is the case, I would think that the pack would look to trade him but may not get much in return if teams realize that he doesn't fit into the 3-4. If a player doesn't fit into the system other teams know that the team looking to trade a player doesn't need to keep him so they do not offer the world. If the Pack was playing the 4-3 obviously Kampmans stock is higher than if he can't make it in the 3-4 IMO. :beer: :yes:
     
  11. dwarf

    dwarf Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2009
    Messages:
    2
    Ratings:
    +0
    Re: (Dont) Rip on TT and MM in here

    TT is an ok GM and MM is a very respectable coach. If you do recall, he led the packers to a 13-3 season right after they had a 4-12 season.
     
  12. lambeauharrier

    lambeauharrier Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    106
    Ratings:
    +0
    no there was an 8-8 in the middle.

    :)
     
  13. Diltzy

    Diltzy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    19
    Ratings:
    +0
    Re: (Dont) Rip on TT and MM in here

    Actually it went, 4-12 , 8-8 , and then 13-3.
     
  14. danielchile

    danielchile Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    282
    Ratings:
    +2
    Re: (Dont) Rip on TT and MM in here

    And then, 6-10. I didn't realize how bad we were last season until I found out that we were picking two spots after the Raiders and one before the 49ers.

    Lots of poor play calling this year. MM trusts A-Rod, but not very much as was proved in some games, like that one against the Panthers or Jax or even against the bears. MM simply stop passing and began to run (nowhere, of course). Crosby failed against the vikes at the metrodome. And the defense...man, that was sad season. At least I really liked what Rodgers did for us at QB.

    I hoped that TT would start signing some FA like Olshansky or Canty...instead, he went for A. Smith (somewhere Brady is laughing about it) and Preston...who can play nice in GB with his size and all that but it's not like "Wow, we got Preston". So, now I'm hoping he does something at the draft.
     
  15. doughsellz

    doughsellz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2008
    Messages:
    301
    Ratings:
    +2
    On the bright side the Patriots won SB XXXVI & proceeded to lay an egg in '02, a 6-10 egg if memory serves me. Go figure the next 2 SBs were theirs as well. Not saying GB is any where near achieving that kind of success but it's happened to other teams before so a fan base can dream, right?

    Want some nice words about TT from a source outside WI? Try this:

    http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/30109315/

    It's a piece about who drafts well & which GMs are most effective at consistently finding the best players.

    TT gets a mention but not for what you'd expect.
     
  16. Lambow

    Lambow Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Messages:
    22
    Ratings:
    +0
    lol Playoff time? hahahahahaaha. TT and MM = EPIC FAIL. Who needs an mvp QB? Wait...Lets change defense's completely instead of patching some holes!
    TT & MM = Alienating veterans and propping up underperfrming horrible draft picks. I usualy look so forward tp the season. this year... not so much.
     
  17. robdog

    robdog Administrator Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,358
    Ratings:
    +308
    You can lean on a really good defense and didn't our offense score a bunch of points last year but we gave up a ton???
     
  18. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

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

    There hasnt been a mvp q/b in GB for over 10 years
     
  19. danielchile

    danielchile Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    282
    Ratings:
    +2
    Touché LOL
     
  20. gcfeldma

    gcfeldma Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    4
    Ratings:
    +0
    TT really has to go. He is terrible for the organization in nearly every way.
     
  21. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    Which way?
     
  22. D.Levens

    D.Levens Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    167
    Ratings:
    +1
    Ted Thompson sucks.

    Literally!
     
  23. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    sounds like you belong here

    fan4ever.com/forum

    This is some of the stuff they spew over there


    Brett nob slobbers, are you one of those?
     
  24. danielchile

    danielchile Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    282
    Ratings:
    +2
    DD is 34, Al Harris is 34 too and Clifton is 32...do they think these players will play until they are 40?
     
  25. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,686
    Ratings:
    +2,977
    They think that anything to do with Brett is reason enough for Ted to let them go..

    You know like, re-signing Driver not once, but TWICE....They still ay Ted is trying to push Driver out

    I say if Driver truly wants a new deal, trade him to the J-E-T-S

    I am tired of these players getting a new deal then a year or 2 later bitching that its not enough

    If this is all true about Driver than screw him..He got a new deal 2 times in last 3 years

    :frustrated:


    I am soooooo anxious to see the season start...And hopefully Driver is on openin day roster...

    That would be damn disappointing for the Brett ball washers cuz it would prove their theory of Ted pushing out Brett's friends isnt true
     

Share This Page