Ted Thompsons five worst moves as GM

[Deleted member 6794]

Coupled with their regular season record (108-67-1) under TT and the fact that under his watch the Packers seem to always lead the league in Players who have only played in the NFL with one team, the Packers, says a lot about his ability to evaluate talent. I'm not saying he shouldn't loosen up and fill some holes with a FA on occasion (Ted's biggest flaw IMO), but I find it hard to be critical of his ability to build a quality team with players he has hand picked. We can all cherry pick bad draft picks in the history of the NFL and try to use them to evaluate a GM, but in fairness, you better include the ones that the GM got right too.

Thompson deserves a ton of credit for drafting Rodgers with his first pick ever as the Packers GM, selecting a future HOFer at the most important position in football. There is some truth to it though that the rest of the roster (evaluating the talent level of all teams without considering the QB position) has been mediocre at best for most of his tenure.

 

[TJV]

Here’s a counter balance, written by Ryan Wood, to the title of this thread and the idea that except for Rodgers, the Packers talent has been mediocre. Data reveals Ted Thompson's draft success; Packers GM has Documented Record of Success.
http://www.packersnews.com/story/sp...data-shows-just-good-thompson-draft/30475885/

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I get the whole "Rodgers made TT successful" argument and there is definitely some truth to it. However, what if TT hadn't selected AR and waited until 2008 and grabbed Joe Flacco? How would this have changed the course of events? Maybe a few more years under Favre and then Flacco, the Packers win more SB's, maybe they don't? So while you can give TT credit and take some away because of Rodgers, you really have to evaluate what the team has done under TT's watch and not what they would have done without Rodgers. He has had his share of successes (Matthews, Nelson, Collins, Sitton, Jennings, Cobb, Lang, Bulaga, Crosby.....) and his share of busts, but what GM hasn't?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Here’s a counter balance, written by Ryan Wood, to the title of this thread and the idea that except for Rodgers, the Packers talent has been mediocre. Data reveals Ted Thompson's draft success; Packers GM has Documented Record of Success.
http://www.packersnews.com/story/sp...data-shows-just-good-thompson-draft/30475885/

The data collected by Ryan Wood for this story is about quantity only but doesn´t give any information about the quality of play. With the Packers having by far the fewest players on the roster who have played for other teams every single season it should come as no surprise they are close to the top of the league in starts and snaps played by draftees.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I get the whole "Rodgers made TT successful" argument and there is definitely some truth to it. However, what if TT hadn't selected AR and waited until 2008 and grabbed Joe Flacco? How would this have changed the course of events? Maybe a few more years under Favre and then Flacco, the Packers win more SB's, maybe they don't? So while you can give TT credit and take some away because of Rodgers, you really have to evaluate what the team has done under TT's watch and not what they would have done without Rodgers. He has had his share of successes (Matthews, Nelson, Collins, Sitton, Jennings, Cobb, Lang, Bulaga, Crosby.....) and his share of busts, but what GM hasn't?

There´s no denying that Thompson has drafted other elite players in Nelson and Matthews and several other very good players. Without an elite QB the overall talent level wouldn´t have been good enough to compete for a Super Bowl on most of his teams though.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There´s no denying that Thompson has drafted other elite players in Nelson and Matthews and several other very good players. Without an elite QB the overall talent level wouldn´t have been good enough to compete for a Super Bowl on most of his teams though.

Right, I get that analysis, but who is to say had TT not drafted AR, we wouldn't have had another elite QB in place?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Right, I get that analysis, but who is to say had TT not drafted AR, we wouldn't have had another elite QB in place?

IMO Andrew Luck is the only other elite QB that has been drafted since 2005, it would have been awfully tough for the Packers to get him. There have been other teams winning the Super Bowl with above average QBs over the last 10 years but I don´t think the Packers overall talent level would have been good enough to do the same.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm not a racing fan, but if an owner assembles a successful race team and people say "he only wins because of the driver he selected". I would ask about the parts of the car, the pit crew and other things that the owner did to form and run the team and how that also may have made the driver successful.

Would AR have had the same success with another team? Probably, but can you be 100% sure? Same thing could be and has been said about Favre under Wolf.

AR may be the driver/engine powering the Packers, but TT deserves some credit for choosing that driver and choosing the rest of the parts that seem to have the Packers in the conversation of being a Super Bowl team every year.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

AR may be the driver/engine powering the Packers, but TT deserves some credit for choosing that driver and choosing the rest of the parts that seem to have the Packers in the conversation of being a Super Bowl team every year.

You realize I´ve given Thompson a ton of credit for drafting Rodgers, don´t you??? If not, you only have to go back to the first post on this page to find evidence for it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You realize I´ve given Thompson a ton of credit for drafting Rodgers, don´t you??? If not, you only have to go back to the first post on this page to find evidence for it.

I know you have.....as you have given TT credit in other areas as well. All is good.

You and I have always been in agreement that TT's biggest weaknesses are his thriftiness and possibly
his ego when it concerns FA's. This is a classic year where most of us are sitting here looking at a very obvious situation of the potential benefits of using the FA market. But does TT see it that way?

 

[TJV]

You and I have always been in agreement that TT's biggest weaknesses are his thriftiness and possibly his ego when it concerns FA's.

I appreciate you wrote "possibly" but could you explain how Thompson's ego has anything to do with his sparse use of free agency? If anyone thinks it has anything to do with his ego, then they would have to think it was a blow to Thompson's ego when he signed Woodson, Pickett, and Peppers, wouldn't they? Even though they worked out. That doesn't make any sense to me. IMO an ego driven GM would be more likely to go "all in" like a certain ego driven owner of the Redskins. Everyone has an ego but I don't see any evidence it has anything to do with Thompson's team building MO. What I see is a GM who truly believes what he is doing is the best way to ensure the long-term success of the team, even if it's not.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

What I see is a GM who truly believes what he is doing is the best way to ensure the long-term success of the team, even if it's not.

This would be "ego" IMO. Doing something your way, because you believe it is the best way, even if it's not.

Ted is very confident and proud of his ability to evaluate talent. He should be, he excels at it. However, IMO at times (not often) he has too much faith and maybe pride in this ability by giving one of his own too much time to prove they are NFL caliber, when they aren't. This situation has been glaring at linebacker for a long time and more recently at TE.

I don't expect all of TT's draft picks to be successful, nor should he, so supplement your failures with FA's but don't hang on to and/or rely on guys to start, that just won't make it in the NFL because you thought they could.

I'm a big fan of TT and think he has done a really good job in GB. My criticism of him in regards to the FA market, by no means is me saying otherwise. His few big moves in the FA market (Woodson, Peppers, Pickett) shows he knows what he is doing there as well and maybe similar opportunities haven't presented themselves enough. But as an observer, a few more of those opportunities need to be created by TT to bump the Packers up to the next level.

 

[Mondio]

It's ALL ****ing EGO, every last one of them. Trust me, you'll never go anywhere, other than by dumb freaking luck in life, if you don't trust in what you're doing or believe in it.

He signs FA, he has singed big FA's, he has signed 2nd tier FA's, he has brought in more UDFA than any of us can remember. You know what Ted's EGO makes him do? Trust in his decisions. It makes him evaluate talent, put a value on it and then see how that is going to affect the rest of the team and the 10,000 other variables it affects from team chemistry to salary cap. If he can get a deal done, he does. If he can't, he moves on and continues to put strong teams on the field along with everyone else involved.

Not that I think belief, ego, confidence, experience, etc are all separate, but I tend to think Ted makes decisions more based on things I would call, experience and belief than "ego", but to each his own.

This isn't Ted not every signing any FA's because we all want him to and he wants to prove to us he knows better just out of spite. I tend to think he's smarter than that. Those people don't accomplish jack squat in life either, and he obviously has in a venue he's dedicated most of his life too.

 

[TJV]

This would be "ego" IMO. Doing something your way, because you believe it is the best way, even if it's not.

I disagree. It is our subjective opinion that it’s not the best way. If he sincerely believes his method is best, that doesn’t have anything to do with ego. For example he could have done an in-depth study which showed that using UFA backfires far more often than not and it should be avoided unless absolutely necessary. He could logically look at that study (or just his observations of the league) and determine the best MO is the one he’s using.

Ted is very confident and proud of his ability to evaluate talent.

He probably is, but because of the way he presents himself in public I think you’d have trouble presenting evidence to support that statement.

My point is the criticisms of Thompson being ego-driven or cheap are unfounded. I have no reason to believe from his point of view he’s doing all he can to bring championships to Green Bay.

 

[Carl]

There´s no denying that Thompson has drafted other elite players in Nelson and Matthews and several other very good players. Without an elite QB the overall talent level wouldn´t have been good enough to compete for a Super Bowl on most of his teams though.

Considering Rodgers alone can put Packers drafting at the end of rounds, it's hard to make an accurate judgement of the rest of the team and compare to the rest of league. Without Rodgers we'd be drafting higher and have much more money to spend elsewhere. Plus, very few teams compete for a Super Bowl without good QB play.

TT has begin to build a solid team around Rodgers the two seasons also.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I disagree. It is our subjective opinion that it’s not the best way. If he sincerely believes his method is best, that doesn’t have anything to do with ego.

Maybe you aren't, but it seems like you are confusing my use of the term of "ego" with "arrogance" as it pertains to TT? I don't believe TT is arrogant, actually quite the opposite. What I was referring to is being able to check in with ones ego...."Did I make the right decision? Are there other alternatives to mine?" I question that he does this consistently.

My point is the criticisms of Thompson being ego-driven or cheap are unfounded. I have no reason to believe from his point of view he’s doing all he can to bring championships to Green Bay.

As far as "cheap", I praise TT and Ball for their work with the salary cap all the time. I called him "thrifty" LOL.....Seems like he is saving up for a rainy day that never comes.

Of course TT is doing what he feels is best to bring championships to GB, never doubted that for a second. Again, what he feels best....doesn't mean its the correct or incorrect way. I love TT and what he has done for The Green Bay Packers, but I still contend, he has a bit too much confidence in his own selections, as a result he hangs on to them too long and doesn't replace them with more qualified FA's. Call it confidence, ego, pride, hope, whatever you want to label it, but IMO its there.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

He signs FA, he has singed big FA's, he has signed 2nd tier FA's, he has brought in more UDFA than any of us can remember.

The Packers have signed a total of 10 unrestricted free agents (only three since 2008) that have played in a game for the team since Thompson took over as the general manager. While it´s true that TT signs free agency he doesn´t use it often enough to address obvious positions of need the draft and develop philosophy hasn´t been able to fill adequately.

Every other team signs a similar amount of undrafted free agents than the Packers. Thompson not signing unrestricted free agents is the main reason more of the UDFAs actually see the field during the regular season in Green Bay.

Plus, very few teams compete for a Super Bowl without good QB play.

Absolutely agree with this statement. The difference being that the Packers need elite QB play to compete for a Super Bowl.

 

[PikeBadger]

I think TT has done a fabulous job and I think his peers feel he is an elite level GM.

My three biggest complaints are:

Justin Harrell pick. Didn't like it when it happened. Should have traded back imo.

About 5 or 6 years ago, he had 11 picks. Should have used 1 as a legacy pick. Trading back into the next year and continue doing that for 3-4 years until you end up with a 1st or 2nd round pick. I know he doesn't believe in banking picks. I think he should, especially when he has multiple 6th or 7th round picks.

I feel at times he has waited too long to release players. That just means his crystal ball doesn't always work well.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

About 5 or 6 years ago, he had 11 picks. Should have used 1 as a legacy pick. Trading back into the next year and continue doing that for 3-4 years until you end up with a 1st or 2nd round pick. I know he doesn't believe in banking picks. I think he should, especially when he has multiple 6th or 7th round picks.

The Packers actually had 11 picks four times (2005, ´06, ´07, ´13) since Thompson took over as GM.

 

[PikeBadger]

The Packers actually had 11 picks four times (2005, ´06, ´07, ´13) since Thompson took over as GM.

The argument could be made that in the early years they needed those 11 picks. By 07 he could have banked one and rode that pick up the ladder and in a few years could have had another top 50 pick. By 13, we didn't need 11 picks.

 

[RRyder]

The Packers have signed a total of 10 unrestricted free agents (only three since 2008) that have played in a game for the team since Thompson took over as the general manager. While it´s true that TT signs free agency he doesn´t use it often enough to address obvious positions of need the draft and develop philosophy hasn´t been able to fill adequately.

Every other team signs a similar amount of undrafted free agents than the Packers. Thompson not signing unrestricted free agents is the main reason more of the UDFAs actually see the field during the regular season in Green Bay.



Absolutely agree with this statement. The difference being that the Packers need elite QB play to compete for a Super Bowl.

not that I disagree but the Packers did win 10 games and make it to OT in the divisional round without anything resembling ELITE from the QB position after week 3 so I'd have to say givin the injuries he's put together a solid team around Rodgers

 

[Deleted member 6794]

not that I disagree but the Packers did win 10 games and make it to OT in the divisional round without anything resembling ELITE from the QB position after week 3 so I'd have to say givin the injuries he's put together a solid team around Rodgers

If you take a closer look though the Packers went 8-7 the rest of the way after week 3 with one the wins coming on the hail mary in Detroit. That record more or less resembles one of a mediocre team.

BTW compared to a lot of other teams the Packers didn't have a lot of injuries in 2015.

 

[Carl]

If you take a closer look though the Packers went 8-7 the rest of the way after week 3 with one the wins coming on the hail mary in Detroit. That record more or less resembles one of a mediocre team.

BTW compared to a lot of other teams the Packers didn't have a lot of injuries in 2015.

How many other teams lost thier top 3-4 guys at one position though? It's not just about the number of injuries, but where they are.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

How many other teams lost thier top 3-4 guys at one position though? It's not just about the number of injuries, but where they are.

While the Packers had injuries at receiver only Nelson was lost for the season.

The Panthers went 15-1 and reached the Super Bowl without Kelvin Benjamin for the entire season although their WR corps was considered far inferior to the Packers one.

The Broncos lost their starting LT in the offseason and his replacement after three games for the season yet were able to win the Super Bowl.

I don't think there's any reason to use injuries as an excuse for the Packers struggles this season.

 

[tstej]

While the Packers had injuries at receiver only Nelson was lost for the season.

The Panthers went 15-1 and reached the Super Bowl without Kelvin Benjamin for the entire season although their WR corps was considered far inferior to the Packers one.

The Broncos lost their starting LT in the offseason and his replacement after three games for the season yet were able to win the Super Bowl.

I don't think there's any reason to use injuries as an excuse for the Packers struggles this season.

I think that's a lazy comparison as neither Benjamin nor clady were cornerstone players of their franchise that Jordy is for Green Bay. I think a better comparison would be to look at how New England struggled when Gronk was injured. Losing Richard Rodgers would not be the same as losing Gronk.