Where does Thompson rank as far as GMs go?

[El Guapo]

Yeah, for a lot of the folks who get riled about not winning the Super Bowl, this is still a team that does quite well each season. Since the 6-10 season in 2008, TT and MM have gone 11-5, 10-6, 15-1, and 11-5 (47-17 overall)over the past four years with two division championships and a Super Bowl win. Most teams, and even Packer fans of the 1970s-early 1990s would kill for that kind of success. I get sick of hearing everyone complain. There is always room for improvement if you don't win the Super Bowl every season, but that's also not realistic from a fan perspective. As the saying goes, I want our team to chase perfection while catching excellence along the way.

This is a very good team around Rodgers. We definitely aren't squandering his prime years. We just need to be realistic about our expectations

 

[AmishMafia]

I also disagree with this assessment. It's been broken down a bit by success versus bust comparison, we've done a study on draft successes and used a different approach. We attempted to break down each selection's relative worth on a scale of 0-5 with 3 being an average starter - i.e. A.J. Hawk - and 6 being PB or All-Pro selections.

In the first round - TT has selected 3 PB's in Rodgers, Raji, and Clay, 1 5-star in Bulaga (my subjective ranking of him), and A.J. Hawk. His only bust is Harrell. He averages a 4.5 level talent in 6 total selections.

Second round - 2 PB's in Jennings and Collins, and 1 5-star in Jordy. His worst selections were Brohm, Pat Lee, and Terrance Murphy (b/c of his injury). His average is 2.89 over 9 selections.

3rd round - James Jones, JMike, and Colledge. Pretty good hauls. Average is 2.8 on 6 picks.

You can see the full breakdown and spreadsheet here if you'd like: http://wp.me/p29VCs-7I
(Remember, this was done last year, so rankings still need to be adjusted for this season. For example, I'm thinking Crosby doesn't deserve that 4-ranking anymore )

Interesting article you wrote. I would suggest making the '6' not be tied to pro-bowl status. Jeff Saturday made the probowl but was the worst player on a average to below average offensive line.

 

[BorderRivals.com]

I appreciate the feedback. We are fully aware the Pro Bowl is somewhat arbitrary and often results in unwarranted PB selections - think Vince Young as the best example or the litany of backups that eventually made the rosters this year. But, we thought it would offer an objective baseline for the highest ranking. Because even if the Pro Bowl has become a joke, it's still considered the all-star game and used by agents/players/HOF voters in analyzing the player.

I appreciate any and all different suggestions on how to draw that line between very good (5) and elite (6) to make our analysis/chart better.

 

[DevilDon]

Yeah, for a lot of the folks who get riled about not winning the Super Bowl, this is still a team that does quite well each season. Since the 6-10 season in 2008, TT and MM have gone 11-5, 10-6, 15-1, and 11-5 (47-17 overall)over the past four years with two division championships and a Super Bowl win. Most teams, and even Packer fans of the 1970s-early 1990s would kill for that kind of success. I get sick of hearing everyone complain. There is always room for improvement if you don't win the Super Bowl every season, but that's also not realistic from a fan perspective. As the saying goes, I want our team to chase perfection while catching excellence along the way.

This is a very good team around Rodgers. We definitely aren't squandering his prime years. We just need to be realistic about our expectations

You sure hit a spot there El Guapo, I lived through the '70's and '80's and it really starts to get tiring to hear fans complain. It was miserable football but it was Packer football so you'd just root for the best... look forward to the draft.... look forward to preseason and enjoy another year.
I almost stopped coming to this board because it really is tiring to read how TT is a tightwad when people have no concept of how the salary cap works and there is no billionaire owner and just how stupid fans can be.
I accept that some fans have no idea that they can't write a check when their balance is negative, I accept that fans like the logo, the colors and the players without any concept of the game. I accept that there are fans who have no idea that every team is limited in how much they spend on salaries and bonuses.
What I have a hard time accepting is fans who have no knowledge of how this all works come on this site and speak with conviction that they have an answer and argue their position to boot.
It's like a 6 year old telling you how to drive a car in snow. Older fans know better and it's a kind of roll your eyes moment when people call TT a "cheapskate".
It's going to be a complete upheaval of top teams this year because of the cap and you better pray to the heavens that TT lives longer because this is his team and he's done a top 3 job protecting the franchise.
Honestly, you should be ashamed if the NFCN title and two playoff games is a failure to you as a fan. No small market team in any sport has achieved this level of excellence and people still want to complain. It's honestly silly.

 

[texaspackerbacker]

El Guapo said: ↑

Yeah, for a lot of the folks who get riled about not winning the Super Bowl, this is still a team that does quite well each season. Since the 6-10 season in 2008, TT and MM have gone 11-5, 10-6, 15-1, and 11-5 (47-17 overall)over the past four years with two division championships and a Super Bowl win. Most teams, and even Packer fans of the 1970s-early 1990s would kill for that kind of success. I get sick of hearing everyone complain. There is always room for improvement if you don't win the Super Bowl every season, but that's also not realistic from a fan perspective. As the saying goes, I want our team to chase perfection while catching excellence along the way.​

​

This is a very good team around Rodgers. We definitely aren't squandering his prime years. We just need to be realistic about our expectations​

You sure hit a spot there El Guapo, I lived through the '70's and '80's and it really starts to get tiring to hear fans complain. It was miserable football but it was Packer football so you'd just root for the best... look forward to the draft.... look forward to preseason and enjoy another year.
I almost stopped coming to this board because it really is tiring to read how TT is a tightwad when people have no concept of how the salary cap works and there is no billionaire owner and just how stupid fans can be.
I accept that some fans have no idea that they can't write a check when their balance is negative, I accept that fans like the logo, the colors and the players without any concept of the game. I accept that there are fans who have no idea that every team is limited in how much they spend on salaries and bonuses.
What I have a hard time accepting is fans who have no knowledge of how this all works come on this site and speak with conviction that they have an answer and argue their position to boot.
It's like a 6 year old telling you how to drive a car in snow. Older fans know better and it's a kind of roll your eyes moment when people call TT a "cheapskate".
It's going to be a complete upheaval of top teams this year because of the cap and you better pray to the heavens that TT lives longer because this is his team and he's done a top 3 job protecting the franchise.
Honestly, you should be ashamed if the NFCN title and two playoff games is a failure to you as a fan. No small market team in any sport has achieved this level of excellence and people still want to complain. It's honestly silly.

True, no other small market team reaches the Packers level of excellence, but I would argue that is in spite of TT's general managership, not because of it. Specifically, it is because of Aaron Rodgers. Yeah, we have to give Thompson some credit for drafting Rodgers, but there honestly is NOT a very good team surrounding Rodgers. Yeah, some of TT's tightness is necessary, but everybody operates in the same constraints of the salary cap, and a lot of teams have worked things out to do more in free agency. Also, a lot of other teams have done better in the early rounds of the draft than Thompson.

 

[BorderRivals.com]

Wow. I completely disagree with this assessment. For every team that you can name where FA has worked, there is another team where FA has failed miserably. Frankly, I'd like to hear your examples where FA worked out so well for a team and made the ultimate difference.

And as for TT's shortcomings in the draft, what is your measure of success? In the first round, he's drafted Rodgers, Raji, Matthews, and Bulaga - all critical players to the team's success. Round two - Jennings, Collins, Cobb, Jordy, and Colledge (who was starter on SB team) - again, all successful and critical players to teams recent success. Round three - JJ, JMike, and Morgan Burnett. Again, key players to team. Sure, there are some misses sprinkled in there: Pat Lee, Brohm, B. Jax, Harrell, Abdul Hodge, and Aaron Rouse - but it's preposterous to think a GM is always going to hit. This team is built through the draft. And as you've seen in previous posts, our record is outstanding. That's indicative to how well TT has done building this team through the draft.[/quote]

 

[texaspackerbacker]

Wow. I completely disagree with this assessment. For every team that you can name where FA has worked, there is another team where FA has failed miserably. Frankly, I'd like to hear your examples where FA worked out so well for a team and made the ultimate difference.

And as for TT's shortcomings in the draft, what is your measure of success? In the first round, he's drafted Rodgers, Raji, Matthews, and Bulaga - all critical players to the team's success. Round two - Jennings, Collins, Cobb, Jordy, and Colledge (who was starter on SB team) - again, all successful and critical players to teams recent success. Round three - JJ, JMike, and Morgan Burnett. Again, key players to team. Sure, there are some misses sprinkled in there: Pat Lee, Brohm, B. Jax, Harrell, Abdul Hodge, and Aaron Rouse - but it's preposterous to think a GM is always going to hit. This team is built through the draft. And as you've seen in previous posts, our record is outstanding. That's indicative to how well TT has done building this team through the draft.

[/quote]

I'm not saying sell out using free agency, just use it slightly more than now. Of the first rounders you mentioned, only Rodgers and Matthews have been up to standard. Bulaga was sub-standard even before his injury last season, Raji has been a major disappointment IMO, and you forgot to mention Hawk, who although serviceable, has been nowhere near as good as a pick that high should be. So two quality first rounders and four quality second rounders in how many years? That's not bad - nobody is saying Thompson is a bad GM. It's just not what I would call great.

The bottom line is, take away Aaron Rodgers, and the Packers are as bad or worse than the Colts were when Peyton Manning went down/left.

 

[El Guapo]

I love scenarios like this, where there is something juicy to pick apart in every word of a post:

...but I would argue that is in spite of TT's general managership, not because of it. Specifically, it is because of Aaron Rodgers.

Maybe you don't understand the role of a general manager but it is, specifically, to create the roster. If Aaron Rodgers is on the team, then the GM gets 100% of the credit just as he gets 100% of the blame for busts.

Yeah, we have to give Thompson some credit for drafting Rodgers, but there honestly is NOT a very good team surrounding Rodgers.

You must be a Bears fan. The team, and specifically the offense, is one of the best in the league. Is your judgement of the team based upon individual skills, team record/performance, or the fact that we lost in the playoffs? Most of the sane world, even the media, believes that the Packers are a very good team. Heck, Vegas always has them high up in the odds for winning it all. You MUST be smarter than the rest of the world.

Yeah, some of TT's tightness is necessary, but everybody operates in the same constraints of the salary cap, and a lot of teams have worked things out to do more in free agency. Also, a lot of other teams have done better in the early rounds of the draft than Thompson.

Name them, please. These are two crazy statements. Specifically, what did all of these teams do in free agency that made them better than Green Bay? Please also least each team that has drafted better in the first round along with your rationale for each. I'm sure you might find a few, but your statement about a lot of teams working free agency better and a lot of teams drafting better just doesn't make sense.

The bottom line is, take away Aaron Rodgers, and the Packers are as bad or worse than the Colts were when Peyton Manning went down/left.

This is the biggest cliche of ignorant sports fans. First of all, any team is generally lost without its stud QB. Then again, Rodgers was taken away twice from Green Bay in the past two seasons. The result? Green Bay almost beat the Patriots in Foxborough, which nobody expected even with a healthy Rodgers. The other game our QB threw for 6 TDs. Please explain how your argument about taking away Rodgers is somehow a critique of the GM. Should we draft QBs in the first round of the next several drafts? I don't even know where your argument is going.

 

[texaspackerbacker]

Pick apart all you want, but the fact remains, the D-Line is awful, the O-Line is mediocre at best, ditto that for the RBs, the receivers seem outstanding, but how much of that is due to Rodgers's scrambling and accuracy?

 

[ivo610]

Pick apart all you want, but the fact remains, the D-Line is awful, the O-Line is mediocre at best, ditto that for the RBs, the receivers seem outstanding, but how much of that is due to Rodgers's scrambling and accuracy?

Speaking of facts, how many seasons have we made the playoffs? I think we had a SB in there. A 15-1 franchise record season too.

 

[texaspackerbacker]

We COULD be better; We SHOULD be better - considering that we have indisputably the best QB in the league, maybe in NFL history at the rate he is going.

 

[DevilDon]

We COULD be better; We SHOULD be better - considering that we have indisputably the best QB in the league, maybe in NFL history at the rate he is going.

We all WANT them to be better but I"m having a hard time understanding where you think this is all going to come from? No team, not one is strong at every position. It's the nature of the league's parity. You can be good at most positions and I think this is where the Packers are.
The DLine is anything but terrible, they're at least middle of the road. The OL has been in a state of flux all year so we don't know what to think of them. Great receivers, outstanding secondary, middling LBs and decent special teams.
In a passing league I'm pleased we have such a high content of receivers and defenders against WRs. Add in the QB and there isn't much to complain about on this team. It seems you're one of those fans who expects a SB each and every year and it's just not going to happen.
Please name one FA who you think will take this team to the SB and please include your explanation on how we will fit that player under the salary cap while also extending contracts of Matthews and Rodgers. Forget Raji, I'm fed up with trying to explain why he's necessary. Just your FA guy, Rodgers and Matthews with $20 mil of cap space at this time and figure $5 mil for draftees.

 

[BorderRivals.com]

We all WANT them to be better but I"m having a hard time understanding where you think this is all going to come from? No team, not one is strong at every position. It's the nature of the league's parity. You can be good at most positions and I think this is where the Packers are.
The DLine is anything but terrible, they're at least middle of the road. The OL has been in a state of flux all year so we don't know what to think of them. Great receivers, outstanding secondary, middling LBs and decent special teams.
In a passing league I'm pleased we have such a high content of receivers and defenders against WRs. Add in the QB and there isn't much to complain about on this team. It seems you're one of those fans who expects a SB each and every year and it's just not going to happen.
Please name one FA who you think will take this team to the SB and please include your explanation on how we will fit that player under the salary cap while also extending contracts of Matthews and Rodgers. Forget Raji, I'm fed up with trying to explain why he's necessary. Just your FA guy, Rodgers and Matthews with $20 mil of cap space at this time and figure $5 mil for draftees.

I think my favorite stat last season regarding our "awful" DL and LB's is we only allowed two running backs to surpass 100-yards: AP and Gore (unfortunately, both did it twice). This means that the likes of Foster, Lynch, Forte, CJ2K, S. Jax, and Bradshaw didn't get 100+ yards. By no means are we dominant up front, but we aren't "awful" either.

 

[AmishMafia]

Maybe TPB thinks TT is a Muslim.


Don't waste your typing. I don't think TPB will ever accept any idea he doesnt want to believe in, regardless of facts or even common sense.


http://www.packerforum.com/threads/politically-incorrect.38170/page-3#post-489666

 

[El Guapo]

On a side note, I had ZERO clue that there was a political forum on this site too. I learned long ago to stay away from those, and will continue to ignore its existence on this wonderful Packer site!

 

[texaspackerbacker]

We all WANT them to be better but I"m having a hard time understanding where you think this is all going to come from? No team, not one is strong at every position. It's the nature of the league's parity. You can be good at most positions and I think this is where the Packers are.
The DLine is anything but terrible, they're at least middle of the road. The OL has been in a state of flux all year so we don't know what to think of them. Great receivers, outstanding secondary, middling LBs and decent special teams.
In a passing league I'm pleased we have such a high content of receivers and defenders against WRs. Add in the QB and there isn't much to complain about on this team. It seems you're one of those fans who expects a SB each and every year and it's just not going to happen.
Please name one FA who you think will take this team to the SB and please include your explanation on how we will fit that player under the salary cap while also extending contracts of Matthews and Rodgers. Forget Raji, I'm fed up with trying to explain why he's necessary. Just your FA guy, Rodgers and Matthews with $20 mil of cap space at this time and figure $5 mil for draftees.

The huge irony is that back 6 or 7 years ago, I was one of TT's biggest defenders when he was unmercifully vilified in various forums. Such a great and extended run of Packer excellence has really turned things around for him. I repeat, I don't think Thompson is a bad GM at all, just not a great one. I would liken him to a lottery winner in a prestigious country club - getting Aaron Rodgers = winning the lottery. Yeah, I'll concede, TT bought the lottery ticket.

No team can be strong at every position? Not to indulge in "what ifs" hahaha, but what if the Niners had taken Aaron Rodgers instead of Alex Smith? Take their D and O-Line and RBs, and Rodgers, and it's pretty hard to see a weakness. OK, wide receiver - but Rodgers would have given them an illusion of greatness too.

 

[ivo610]

The huge irony is that back 6 or 7 years ago, I was one of TT's biggest defenders when he was unmercifully vilified in various forums. Such a great and extended run of Packer excellence has really turned things around for him. I repeat, I don't think Thompson is a bad GM at all, just not a great one. I would liken him to a lottery winner in a prestigious country club - getting Aaron Rodgers = winning the lottery. Yeah, I'll concede, TT bought the lottery ticket.

No team can be strong at every position? Not to indulge in "what ifs" hahaha, but what if the Niners had taken Aaron Rodgers instead of Alex Smith? Take their D and O-Line and RBs, and Rodgers, and it's pretty hard to see a weakness. OK, wide receiver - but Rodgers would have given them an illusion of greatness too.

Doesn't work that way.

They get Rodgers. Is Rodgers ready to play year 1? Does he get shell shocked from holding the ball too long? Is he ever the same?

So he's great. So the 9ers don't get the same draft picks. Do they draft differently? Well the salary cap is now different bc of a big QBs contract.

 

[DevilDon]

The huge irony is that back 6 or 7 years ago, I was one of TT's biggest defenders when he was unmercifully vilified in various forums. Such a great and extended run of Packer excellence has really turned things around for him. I repeat, I don't think Thompson is a bad GM at all, just not a great one. I would liken him to a lottery winner in a prestigious country club - getting Aaron Rodgers = winning the lottery. Yeah, I'll concede, TT bought the lottery ticket.

No team can be strong at every position? Not to indulge in "what ifs" hahaha, but what if the Niners had taken Aaron Rodgers instead of Alex Smith? Take their D and O-Line and RBs, and Rodgers, and it's pretty hard to see a weakness. OK, wide receiver - but Rodgers would have given them an illusion of greatness too.

Wut?
I don't get the lottery winner in the prestigious country club analogy. You either win the lottery or not. You could win it sitting on the crapper and it won't make the winning any less eventful.
So you're a TT defender when he's being unmercifully vilified but now you feel it's okay to vilify him?
The problem you have is that you think all teams would draft the same. Looking back on that draft if Rodgers was as good as he is now would they have drafted more offense to surround him with talent? WOULD Rodgers be as good? He would not have been given the time to learn his craft as he did here. Alex Smith was thrown to the wolves, would Alex Smith be our Aaron Rodgers right now?
It's just impossible to say. I can say with relative clarity is that TT has drafted and developed a consistent playoff contender without any drop off to regroup. This is a decidedly uncharacteristic trait among NFL teams.
Of the other 31 teams, who would you say we lag behind?
NE? ATL? SF? Baltimore?
I'd rather be a Packer fan than fans of those teams, nobody has had the consistent production the Packers have and some will fall off rapidly as the salary cap catches up with them.... most notably the 9ers.

 

[El Guapo]

Not to indulge in "what ifs" hahaha, but what if the Niners had taken Aaron Rodgers instead of Alex Smith? Take their D and O-Line and RBs, and Rodgers, and it's pretty hard to see a weakness. OK, wide receiver - but Rodgers would have given them an illusion of greatness too.

First of all, the reality of the 2005 draft is that the only winner in the Rodgers/Smith saga was going to be whomever got to marinate on the bench for a few years behind a HOF quarterback. Neither had much of a chance, despite all of the experts' opinions, at rookie success.

I don't see San Francisco's success or fortunes changing one bit having drafted Rodgers instead of Smith. They'd still be one Super Bowl and several division championships behind TT's lottery ticket work.

Let's look at the heroes of the 2010 Super Bowl run:
Wild Card vs Eagles: James Starks and Tramon Williams
Divisional vs Falcons: Rodgers, Tramon, Kuhn
Championship vs Bears: Shields, Raji
Super Bowl: Jennings, Matthews, Jarrett Bush, Nick Collins/Howard Green

All of these lottery tickets that TT put in place...how lucky

Good day sir

 

[texaspackerbacker]

Wut?
I don't get the lottery winner in the prestigious country club analogy. You either win the lottery or not. You could win it sitting on the crapper and it won't make the winning any less eventful.
So you're a TT defender when he's being unmercifully vilified but now you feel it's okay to vilify him?
The problem you have is that you think all teams would draft the same. Looking back on that draft if Rodgers was as good as he is now would they have drafted more offense to surround him with talent? WOULD Rodgers be as good? He would not have been given the time to learn his craft as he did here. Alex Smith was thrown to the wolves, would Alex Smith be our Aaron Rodgers right now?
It's just impossible to say. I can say with relative clarity is that TT has drafted and developed a consistent playoff contender without any drop off to regroup. This is a decidedly uncharacteristic trait among NFL teams.
Of the other 31 teams, who would you say we lag behind?
NE? ATL? SF? Baltimore?
I'd rather be a Packer fan than fans of those teams, nobody has had the consistent production the Packers have and some will fall off rapidly as the salary cap catches up with them.... most notably the 9ers.

Do I really need to explain the analogy? I don't know how old you are, Don, but think Rodney Dangerfield if that means anything to you. Am I "vilifying" Thompson simply by not showing him the man-love that some of you guys do (hell yeah that's a reference to what his detractors used to say - or do you not get that one also?)?

Yeah, I expected the stuff about the Niners not getting as high draft picks if Rodgers played better than Alex Smith. True, but my only point is that somebody said you can't put together a team that is strong at all positions. The first counter example I could think of was San Fran. I could have just included Kaepernick instead of the Rodgers for Smith thing. It's pretty hard to find a weakness on that team.

I don't hate Ted Thompson, not even close, but there is a huge amount of ground between Hate and Great. TT is somewhere in that ground. Is that fair enough for you TT-ophiles?

 

[DevilDon]

Do I really need to explain the analogy? I don't know how old you are, Don, but think Rodney Dangerfield if that means anything to you. Am I "vilifying" Thompson simply by not showing him the man-love that some of you guys do (hell yeah that's a reference to what his detractors used to say - or do you not get that one also?)?

Yeah, I expected the stuff about the Niners not getting as high draft picks if Rodgers played better than Alex Smith. True, but my only point is that somebody said you can't put together a team that is strong at all positions. The first counter example I could think of was San Fran. I could have just included Kaepernick instead of the Rodgers for Smith thing. It's pretty hard to find a weakness on that team.

I don't hate Ted Thompson, not even close, but there is a huge amount of ground between Hate and Great. TT is somewhere in that ground. Is that fair enough for you TT-ophiles?

LOL, so country club, Rodney Dangerfield, NFL, lottery.... oh yea, I get it, kind of a stream of consciousness thing.
Because if you're referencing Caddyshack it was a movie involving golf right?
I'm very pleased with Thompson's drafts and his ability to find late round (say UDFA) gems. I can't imagine how you think he's middle of the road. OK, I'll give you the 9ers tpb, but name another team as stocked as the Packers. And as I said, the 9ers are a product of poor play year in and year out, watch what happens to their roster after success raids their cap. It will be ugly.
And here's the thing - they didn't win the SB did they? A far less talented roster won it that day. It's not as simple as you suggest I think.

 

[texaspackerbacker]

LOL, so country club, Rodney Dangerfield, NFL, lottery.... oh yea, I get it, kind of a stream of consciousness thing.
Because if you're referencing Caddyshack it was a movie involving golf right?
I'm very pleased with Thompson's drafts and his ability to find late round (say UDFA) gems. I can't imagine how you think he's middle of the road. OK, I'll give you the 9ers tpb, but name another team as stocked as the Packers. And as I said, the 9ers are a product of poor play year in and year out, watch what happens to their roster after success raids their cap. It will be ugly.
And here's the thing - they didn't win the SB did they? A far less talented roster won it that day. It's not as simple as you suggest I think.

I'd be willing to split the difference between middle of the road and great - call TT a "well above average GM" based on his drafting Rodgers and Matthews, several good second and third rounders, and his knack for getting those late round and FA gems. Does that satisfy you and his other fans?

I don't really like praising other teams, but there are several others who have stocked their roster seemingly better than the Packers. Houston comes to mind - granted worse record/higher draft picks there too, New England, Pittsburgh - for a long time, maybe the Giants. Yeah, with Rodgers at QB and McCarthy coach (yeah I know, TT gets credit for that too), the Packers are at least on that level, maybe better, but man for man, player for player, position for position, they come up short. THAT is why I say, as great as the Packers are and have been through Thompson's time as GM, they could and should be better at maybe more than half of the positions.

 

[ivo610]

I'd be willing to split the difference between middle of the road and great - call TT a "well above average GM" based on his drafting Rodgers and Matthews, several good second and third rounders, and his knack for getting those late round and FA gems. Does that satisfy you and his other fans?

I don't really like praising other teams, but there are several others who have stocked their roster seemingly better than the Packers. Houston comes to mind - granted worse record/higher draft picks there too, New England, Pittsburgh - for a long time, maybe the Giants. Yeah, with Rodgers at QB and McCarthy coach (yeah I know, TT gets credit for that too), the Packers are at least on that level, maybe better, but man for man, player for player, position for position, they come up short. THAT is why I say, as great as the Packers are and have been through Thompson's time as GM, they could and should be better at maybe more than half of the positions.

If you are going to call Rodgers "luck" please feel free to call heavy injuries and the loss of an elite pro bowl safety "unlucky".

 

[El Guapo]

True, but my only point is that somebody said you can't put together a team that is strong at all positions. The first counter example I could think of was San Fran. I could have just included Kaepernick instead of the Rodgers for Smith thing. It's pretty hard to find a weakness on that team

That was me talking about not being strong at all positions. Sorry, let me clarify. If your team sucks for a decade and you constantly have draft picks in the Top 10, it is possible to eventually have a strong, well-rounded team. I guess that you made a point

 

[HyponGrey]

That was me talking about not being strong at all positions. Sorry, let me clarify. If your team sucks for a decade and you constantly have draft picks in the Top 10, it is possible to eventually have a strong, well-rounded team. I guess that you made a point

Detroit Lions. Your argument is invalid.