Will Teddy act now?

Status
Not open for further replies.

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
I don’t know if Thompson is the best GM in the league but IMO he’s in the conversation. Since he took over as VP/GM the Packers have won 3 division titles and, of course, a title. His teams have won 61% of their regular season games (66% after he was able to hire “his” HC) and 6 of 10 playoff games. His teams have won 10 or more games in each of the previous four seasons and they are likely to again this season in spite of a flood of injuries. How many teams’ fans would trade that record with their own?

But like every other GM he makes mistakes and there’s nothing wrong with criticizing any move he makes or doesn’t make. As far as I know, the majority of posters here have disagreed with something Thompson has done or didn’t do, but the majority also recognizes his accomplishments. Almost all have reveled in them because they are Packers fans first and foremost.

But what I have a problem with is so-called Packers fans who hate Thompson and allow that to color every observation they make. I have found most of such fans to be Favre-fans first and most are relatively uninformed, ironically even about the events surrounding Favre’s departure from the Packers. Their perspective leads them to make some illogical statements. For example, one such “fan” (no longer active here) started a thread hours before the first playoff game of the 2010 championship season titled, “Why didn’t we trade for Marshawn Lynch again?”. Hours before a playoff game that’s where his focus was. Then more than two years later in May of 2012 the same poster wrote this on the same (now closed) thread, “Point is we could have had Lynch for the Small small price for a second round pick (used on Randall Cobb a returner and our 5th WR). We could have had a pro bowl running back for a guy that barely gets on the field.” That’s what he posted even though he had watched the Packers win four consecutive playoff games to win it all without Lynch and even though he had seen the results of some of Thompson’s second round picks. And that Favre-fan perspective leads others to post Thompson is a "hack".

After Grant was lost for the 2010 season and it became evident Jackson was just a third down back, I advocated for Thompson to acquire another RB (not necessarily Lynch) and not rely on the injured and inexperienced Starks for the playoff run. But I was wrong and Thompson was right and I could not have been happier! I’m always happy to be wrong when what I was wrong about turns out to be something positive for the Packers.

I’ve never been a bigger fan of a person associated with the Packers than the Packers organization. Not even Vince Lombardi and it was amazing being a Packers fan during his tenure. So it baffles me someone calling themselves a Packers fan could hate a GM who built a team that won a championship and has had the string of success Thompson has had, particularly over the last four seasons. All because of an allegiance to a player who thought he was bigger than the franchise.
 
OP
OP
Bus Cook

Bus Cook

You're never alone with a schizophrenic
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
464
Reaction score
29
Location
Wilmette=>Fontana=>Lake Geneva=>Michigan ugh
Your the troll...u make no sense whatsoever....
How does it not makes sense? I can understand that some will follow TT down the path of doing nothing but draft, but how can it not make sense? There are 32 teams in the NFL. If all of them lost three starting receivers, that were all out for an extended period of time, I can imagine that at least one team would go out and get a replacement receiver. And somehow it wouldn't make sense to you? You couldn't imagine the likelihood that a team would address a need? You can't imagine intraseason moves? Trades don't make sense to you? Signing free agents doesn't make sense to you? I have no problem with this being a 75% follow TT board, but to say that it doesn't make sense to address a possible need, really puts you in the top 99th percentile.
 

gbpack12_2_89

Bleeding Green and Gold
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
702
Reaction score
133
Location
Green Bay Wisconsin
How does it not makes sense? I can understand that some will follow TT down the path of doing nothing but draft, but how can it not make sense? There are 32 teams in the NFL. If all of them lost three starting receivers, that were all out for an extended period of time, I can imagine that at least one team would go out and get a replacement receiver. And somehow it wouldn't make sense to you? You couldn't imagine the likelihood that a team would address a need? You can't imagine intraseason moves? Trades don't make sense to you? Signing free agents doesn't make sense to you? I have no problem with this being a 75% follow TT board, but to say that it doesn't make sense to address a possible need, really puts you in the top 99th percentile.
So let's trade away draft picks for a band aide? Ya let's go trade away a 2-3 round pick get a guy that wants a huge contract sign him to a 9 game contract cut someone important on our team and then have him be gone the next year. Sounds like a great use of a draft pick!!
 

gbpack12_2_89

Bleeding Green and Gold
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
702
Reaction score
133
Location
Green Bay Wisconsin
Also do you see Chicago going after other LBs? I'm pretty sure there down 3-4 LBs from last year that r on IR...or what if he team sucks and then they go get a QB and give him a contract and he also sucks...cough Vikings cough...
 
OP
OP
Bus Cook

Bus Cook

You're never alone with a schizophrenic
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
464
Reaction score
29
Location
Wilmette=>Fontana=>Lake Geneva=>Michigan ugh
So let's trade away draft picks for a band aide? Ya let's go trade away a 2-3 round pick get a guy that wants a huge contract sign him to a 9 game contract cut someone important on our team and then have him be gone the next year. Sounds like a great use of a draft pick!!
Another straw man. We could get a guy that will be around next year. We could get a guy that doesn't get a huge contract. We could cut someone who is less important to our team.

Typical nonsensical response

"we need help at ________"

response, "and what have to get rid of AR, CM3 and all of our 1st round picks for the next 5 years"
 
OP
OP
Bus Cook

Bus Cook

You're never alone with a schizophrenic
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
464
Reaction score
29
Location
Wilmette=>Fontana=>Lake Geneva=>Michigan ugh
Also do you see Chicago going after other LBs? I'm pretty sure there down 3-4 LBs from last year that r on IR...or what if he team sucks and then they go get a QB and give him a contract and he also sucks...cough Vikings cough...
I don't know as I don't really follow the Bears, but I read here, from some "Packer Fans" that when a team loses their starting QB, you hope to lose out so you can get a better pick in the next draft, as you'll have no chance to win with a backup QB.
 

gbpack12_2_89

Bleeding Green and Gold
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
702
Reaction score
133
Location
Green Bay Wisconsin
Another straw man. We could get a guy that will be around next year. We could get a guy that doesn't get a huge contract. We could cut someone who is less important to our team.

Typical nonsensical response

"we need help at ________"

response, "and what have to get rid of AR, CM3 and all of our 1st round picks for the next 5 years"
So pretty much we could get a guy like Boykin?
 

gbpack12_2_89

Bleeding Green and Gold
Joined
Aug 17, 2010
Messages
702
Reaction score
133
Location
Green Bay Wisconsin
I don't know as I don't really follow the Bears, but I read here, from some "Packer Fans" that when a team loses their starting QB, you hope to lose out so you can get a better pick in the next draft, as you'll have no chance to win with a backup QB.
Ya pretty sure I haven't seen "if you lose a starting QB let's tank the season on this forum" you may be thinking of the colts or the Vikings or the browns but not on here.
My guess is you want us to tank the season so you can be like "oh hey guys I told you we should of went out and got 10 recievers" "told you guys TT dosnt know what he's doing and I am a way better arm chair GM"
Go away troll...
 
OP
OP
Bus Cook

Bus Cook

You're never alone with a schizophrenic
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
464
Reaction score
29
Location
Wilmette=>Fontana=>Lake Geneva=>Michigan ugh
Ya pretty sure I haven't seen "if you lose a starting QB let's tank the season on this forum" you may be thinking of the colts or the Vikings or the browns but not on here.
My guess is you want us to tank the season so you can be like "oh hey guys I told you we should of went out and got 10 recievers" "told you guys TT dosnt know what he's doing and I am a way better arm chair GM"
Go away troll...

If Rodgers gets injured, I would personally want to tank to get a better pick since the season is basically over anyways. Why would you want a good backup to lose in the first round of the playoffs and get a bad pick?

"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."-- Mark Twain ...
 

RockyRaccoon

Day Tripper
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
115
Reaction score
16
Location
Heart of Bear Country
Why are you guy's (and gal's) still responding to this person. Stop and he will go away.
Number one rule of the Internet: Don't Feed the Trolls.

Sometimes that is easier said than done. The imbecilic nature of many of this particular troll's posts makes it very hard to bite my tongue at times.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
Another straw man. We could get a guy that will be around next year. We could get a guy that doesn't get a huge contract. We could cut someone who is less important to our team.

Typical nonsensical response

"we need help at ________"

response, "and what have to get rid of AR, CM3 and all of our 1st round picks for the next 5 years"

You still havent answered this question

My question was if we trade for a Wr who do we drop to add him..Cant jst add a guy and not drop someone...That is a logical question and should be easy to answer..

Or another one that was not answered...

During the off season what player(s) did you want and what players would have not been signed or added to the 53 roster so we could have the players you wanted...
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
We could get a guy that will be around next year. We could get a guy that doesn't get a huge contract. We could cut someone who is less important to our team.

You want Nicks..So we trade for him

What would you offer and who would you cut

What would you offer him to stay here for years?
 
OP
OP
Bus Cook

Bus Cook

You're never alone with a schizophrenic
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
464
Reaction score
29
Location
Wilmette=>Fontana=>Lake Geneva=>Michigan ugh
You still havent answered this question

My question was if we trade for a Wr who do we drop to add him..Cant jst add a guy and not drop someone...That is a logical question and should be easy to answer..

Or another one that was not answered...

During the off season what player(s) did you want and what players would have not been signed or added to the 53 roster so we could have the players you wanted...
I did answer the question. I said that at this time, I see no need for Kuhn and my response elicited the response that I expected. Someone responded that what would we do on special teams, without Kuhn? This dovetails nicely with your other question. In the off season, I would have wanted Kuhn on the 53 because I feared for AR's life and I didn't think that our running game was worth at Thompson up to that time. THEN THINGS CHANGED. This is the part that most posters here fail to consider. Our makeshift line was protecting better than anyone thought going into the season. Our running game developed. AND our receiving corps became decimated. The former two developments make Kuhn at least less valuable and to me, not needed. I see the need for a #2/#3 WR greater than the need to keep a very average rusher, above average pass blocker, good S/T player on the team.

I'm no less of a GM than anyone else that posts here. All the GMs post over at the packernews forum. You may not agree with my Kuhn for WR tradeoff, but its my opinion, and it has merit.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
I did answer the question. I said that at this time, I see no need for Kuhn and my response elicited the response that I expected. Someone responded that what would we do on special teams, without Kuhn? This dovetails nicely with your other question. In the off season, I would have wanted Kuhn on the 53 because I feared for AR's life and I didn't think that our running game was worth at Thompson up to that time. THEN THINGS CHANGED. This is the part that most posters here fail to consider. Our makeshift line was protecting better than anyone thought going into the season. Our running game developed. AND our receiving corps became decimated. The former two developments make Kuhn at least less valuable and to me, not needed. I see the need for a #2/#3 WR greater than the need to keep a very average rusher, above average pass blocker, good S/T player on the team.

I'm no less of a GM than anyone else that posts here. All the GMs post over at the packernews forum. You may not agree with my Kuhn for WR tradeoff, but its my opinion, and it has merit.


Ok, who do you sign????

Drop Kuhn..Who takes his ST spot?
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
1,576
Reaction score
377
Location
Charlotte
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."-- Mark Twain ...
"Thy art tank for thy first draft pick may have whomever they desire and go onto win even more championships than before... unless your name is thy Browns" -- Mark Twain ...
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
I agree, and listening to Bob Kravitz of the Indianapolis Star in the car earlier today on Mike & Mike or Cowheep discussing the rumor that with the loss of Wayne for the season, there may be a strong possibility that the Colts may seek a trade for Hakeem Nicks pretty quick which may take him off the table really soon anyway which may be a blessing in disguise for the temptation to give up too much to get him. You're right, Amish.....much too costly to roll the dice on this guy. I never welcomed the thought of trading for yet another injury prone player such as Nicks who also brings a steep price tag. Don't know what TT has up his sleeve, but HN is not the answer.

If they trade for Hakeem Nicks, it's going to be real interesting to see the ramifications a few years down the line. They already gave up their first round pick for Richardson, and and a conditional pick for Josh Gordy, though they're getting a conditional pick from Baltimore. They also traded their 7th round pick to the Niners. If they give up a 2nd or 3rd round pick for Nicks, that's going to leave their 2014 draft pretty thin.
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
To me it says you wanted to replace those some if not all..

No, it's because he wants someone with name recognition, rather than someone off our practice squad. Which is just stupid, because having name recognition doesn't automatically make you a good fit.

Seriously, this thread needs a **** button.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!
 
Last edited:
I

I asked LT to delete my acct

Guest
"Thy art tank for thy first draft pick may have whomever they desire and go onto win even more championships than before... unless your name is thy Browns" -- Mark Twain ...

C`mon, did Mark Twain REALLY say all that ???......really ? :D
 
OP
OP
Bus Cook

Bus Cook

You're never alone with a schizophrenic
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
464
Reaction score
29
Location
Wilmette=>Fontana=>Lake Geneva=>Michigan ugh
I've been informed by the mods that thinking that TT is a hack is against board rules and considered trolling. Many posters here, know me from other boards and would know, with certainty, that my opinion of TT is genuine, consistent and not trolling. Sorry that 90+ % of you disagree, but that's my opinion. I don't mind that you disagree with me, but I guess its tough for some to be disagreed with. So I'll refrain from criticizing the beloved TT, to avoid being banned for my opinion. If my "trolling" extends beyond that, I'll look to the mods for guidance.
 

Oshkoshpackfan

YUT !!!
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
3,286
Reaction score
260
Location
Camp Lejeune NC
No, you just happen to make yourself look like a **** monkey when you spout off about certain subjects, TT being one of them. You end up putting your foot in your mouth so often I bet your breath smells like toe jam. You just need to chill with the dumb threads and crazy posts.

ANOTHER THING: STOP following people from thread to thread quoting their posts, you are baiting for a response and that is annoying as all hell. You are like the buzzing around your ear mosquito of the forum. Stop already.



*end feeding time*
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Latest posts

Top