Current vs Future - Does MM & TT have the right idea?

[Packer Brother]

Super Bowl or bust is my mantra and should be the organization's mantra too. I believe fans are becoming impatient if not somewhat apathetic. 900 season tickets were available this year, not too mention the fact they had trouble selling during the lottery ticket draw. That should definitely be wake up call:

http://fox11online.com/news/local/green-bay/700-packers-fans-become-season-ticket-holders


http://fox11online.com/sports/packe...n-tickets-decreasing-brown-co-lottery-tickets

"The Packers say the reason for the reduced number of tickets is due to the decrease in demand."

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Super Bowl or bust is my mantra and should be the organization's mantra too. I believe fans are becoming impatient if not somewhat apathetic. 900 season tickets were available this year, not too mention the fact they had trouble selling during the lottery ticket draw.

Over the last 10 seasons a total of 12,491 season tickets have become available. That number includes more than 5,000 because of the stadium expansion in 2013. With more than 100,000 names on the waiting list there's no reason for concern.

 

[Packer Brother]

Over the last 10 seasons a total of 12,491 season tickets have become available. That number includes more than 5,000 because of the stadium expansion in 2013. With more than 100,000 names on the waiting list there's no reason for concern.

I was speaking strictly on this season. 900 tickets became available with no expansion or anything. That is an unusual high amount of non renewed tickets. Obviously they won't have trouble selling out. Just pointing out signs of impatience are indeed present.

 

[Poppa San]

"The Packers say the reason for the reduced number of tickets is due to the decrease in demand."

As a county lottery non-player, after the first few seasons, I had a perspective change. I've had to eat the cost of preseason games because no one wanted tickets for a game I couldn't get to and that I didn't want to buy either. It's not like I had to take them to get tickets to the regular season either. The seats are way up in the south endzone so it is not like premium seating. More county residents would play if we could cross off games we can't or won't go to. For those games, I can get much better seats for a slight cost increase from scalpers. That leaves gambling on getting a "good" game such as last year Thanksgiving, or season finale or rival game.

 

[Packer Brother]

As a county lottery non-player, after the first few seasons, I had a perspective change. I've had to eat the cost of preseason games because no one wanted tickets for a game I couldn't get to and that I didn't want to buy either. It's not like I had to take them to get tickets to the regular season either. The seats are way up in the south endzone so it is not like premium seating. More county residents would play if we could cross off games we can't or won't go to. For those games, I can get much better seats for a slight cost increase from scalpers. That leaves gambling on getting a "good" game such as last year Thanksgiving, or season finale or rival game.

Packers have become greedy. They think whatever they sell, fans will just buy.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I was speaking strictly on this season. 900 tickets became available with no expansion or anything. That is an unusual high amount of non renewed tickets. Obviously they won't have trouble selling out. Just pointing out signs of impatience are indeed present.

Taking a look at the numbers I posted above the average number of season tickets that have become available over the last 10 years is over 800 (not including 2013 because of the stadium expansion). As I've said before no reason to be worried.

 

[PikeBadger]

Seriously? You need to lay off your green tinted specs.

It was a discussion in a crucial decision affecting the team. Such over the top blind support is just as ridiculous the negativity you perceive this thread to be.

Not everything in the thread is negative. Plenty of snarkiness though. It's clear that Thompson isn't going to win any popularity contests here, LOL.

No, I most definitely don't need to take off my Packer specs. I think Thompson has earned my "blind" support because quite frankly, all of us are flying blind in terms of getting anything close to complete information.

 

[PikeBadger]

May I know what's kneejerk here? Never claimed we'd lose or fail, did I?

It was a decision that got even experienced reporters perplexed and if that's not worth a discussion, I fail to see what is.

Experienced reporters don't have all the info either. Ever see a Ted Thompson press conference?

 

[PikeBadger]

It's no secret that I would like Thompson to be more active in free agency and not to overpay to re-sign the team's own free agents but overall I agree with Thompson's approach to have a long-term plan resulting in the Packers consistently making the playoffs. Going all in for a single season doesn't guarantee winning the Super Bowl either.

With that being said it's extremely tough to make sense of releasing Sitton less than 10 days before the season opener. In my opinion it's obvious this move weakens the offensive line for this season without presenting a chance to improve in the long haul.



That quote should serve as evidence for your blind support of Thompson. I have a hard time understanding any Packers fan not even questioning the meaningfulness of releasing Sitton.

Then you've got a short memory. I've stated at least three times in threads that you personally always dismissed as foolishness, that I felt their was a strong likelihood that we would play the 16 season without one of Sitton/Lang. That is not what I call blind support. It is what I expected to happen. Apparently the coaching staff feels that it is time for Taylor to take the next step.

 

[sschind]

We do seem to have more than our fair share of nattering nabobs of negativism here. Some times it seems like we are a perennial 6-10 team whose owner refuses to fire the GM.

There are 31 other teams trying to win the SB every year. It amazes me how so many people think that just because we have a great QB we should a shoe in for the championship every single year. If we don't have a good team we don't get that close. If we are not a good team we don't lose 3 playoff games on the last play because we are not even in those games. We are in those games because of the good team Ted Thompson has built.

 

[Half Empty]

Just tone it down a notch, and there'd be little with which to argue. Because we have a great QB, we can reasonably expect to be in the hunt every year. Sure, if we don't have a 'good' team, it gets a whole lot tougher, but 'good' could well mean the rest of the team is in the top half. If we have a 'good' team get us to the playoffs, how can a 'good' team blow it year after year?

If we set up a poll and asked what our chances are without Rodgers, regardless of the rest of the team, do you think the results would be anything other than "we're screwed"?

 

[RRyder]

Just tone it down a notch, and there'd be little with which to argue. Because we have a great QB, we can reasonably expect to be in the hunt every year. Sure, if we don't have a 'good' team, it gets a whole lot tougher, but 'good' could well mean the rest of the team is in the top half. If we have a 'good' team get us to the playoffs, how can a 'good' team blow it year after year?

If we set up a poll and asked what our chances are without Rodgers, regardless of the rest of the team, do you think the results would be anything other than "we're screwed"?

Well because most every good team that doesnt end up winning the SB "blow it" in the playoffs. Even the gold standard Patriots have lost plenty if games in the playoffs the could've won. Look at most of those Ravens/Pats games and you can argue most of those were won by the other team "blowing it". Or look at Seattle. After we get done "blowing it" in the NFCCG against them one week later the "blow it" in the SB against NE and then just this year they needed Minnesota to "blow it" against them in order to advance past the WC Round.

Really though in any case "blowing it" as you put it would be an indictment on coaching since the talent was able to get them there in the first place.

 

[rodell330]

The Packers just need to learn how to close out games. If they knew how to do that? (especially in the playoffs) they probably would have at least another SB.

 

[Half Empty]

Sure you quoted the right post? First I only said most fans think that, since we've got a Top-2 QB, we ought to be in the mix for the Lombardi every year, not that they think we are a shoe-in. The remainder went on to say that some think a great QB is more important than a good team (expressed in quotes because all terms need to be explained, and I noted what I thought could be considered a 'good' team). I'm a Packer fan, so I only was paying attention to our playoff losses, but you could certainly extend your "blow it" (I assume the quotes mean you don't think it's an applicable term) to include the Seattle game, et. al. I include coaching as part of the failures if inappropriate play calls, but certainly good teams can blow it through mental or physical errors.

 

[Packer Brother]

The Packers just need to learn how to close out games. If they knew how to do that? (especially in the playoffs) they probably would have at least another SB.

Agreed. If this team doesn't win another SB under Rodgers, January 18th 2015 will live in infamy. I can't remember a bigger choke than that.

 

[PikeBadger]

Well because most every good team that doesnt end up winning the SB "blow it" in the playoffs. Even the gold standard Patriots have lost plenty if games in the playoffs the could've won. Look at most of those Ravens/Pats games and you can argue most of those were won by the other team "blowing it". Or look at Seattle. After we get done "blowing it" in the NFCCG against them one week later the "blow it" in the SB against NE and then just this year they needed Minnesota to "blow it" against them in order to advance past the WC Round.

Really though in any case "blowing it" as you put it would be an indictment on coaching since the talent was able to get them there in the first place.

Three yards and one play against a reeling and discombobulated defense is all it took to advance to the NFCCG

 

[RRyder]

Sure you quoted the right post? First I only said most fans think that, since we've got a Top-2 QB, we ought to be in the mix for the Lombardi every year, not that they think we are a shoe-in. The remainder went on to say that some think a great QB is more important than a good team (expressed in quotes because all terms need to be explained, and I noted what I thought could be considered a 'good' team). I'm a Packer fan, so I only was paying attention to our playoff losses, but you could certainly extend your "blow it" (I assume the quotes mean you don't think it's an applicable term) to include the Seattle game, et. al. I include coaching as part of the failures if inappropriate play calls, but certainly good teams can blow it through mental or physical errors.

I was only trying to address the fact that it's not just the Packers that haven blown their opportunities in the POs the last few years but rather that the reason that most teams that dont win a SB in any particular year generally blow their opportunity at a crucial time in the POs.

I wasn't calling out you but rather the perception by many that the Packers are either the only, or one of the select few teams, that have let opportunities slip their hands

 

[Half Empty]

Sorry, just didn't come across to me that way - hence, just confusion. No argument with your actual point.

 

[PackerDNA]

It's criminal that the Rodgers era has only produced one championship so far, but it's not surprising given that Ted is working in a perpetual state of rebuilding. If I was Rodgers I would be livid. His window will start to close sooner than later and it seems Ted is ALWAYS more interested in being a playoff team for the next five years instead of being a champion in the current year. At some point the future has to be now and if this trend continues, there will be no more Super Bowls for Rodgers unless he carries the entire team on his back. I've always believed TT was an overrated GM. The only reason the Packers have been a winning team under his watch is because Rodgers fell into his lap at the 2005 draft. That's not shrewd drafting, it's pure luck. We've seen what happened in 2013 when Rodgers is not behind center. A 2-4-1 record that was a Cowboys choke job away from being 1-5-1. We're a 4-5 win team without Rodgers, and that's on Ted. Cutting Sitton in favor of an UFA scrub made the Packers a weaker team than they were just two short days ago in a year where they were considered by many a Super Bowl favorite.

Saved me from a lot of typing. This to me is the crux of the matter with Thompson, and why I no longer believe the Packers get to another SB as long as he's the GM.
Risk averse, stubborn, refuses to use all tools at his disposal, and most of all , more concerned with the next 5 years than this year.
Old saying, Ted; 'Tomorrow 'never comes'..

 

[Jerellh528]

Yeah, I agree with the point someone made earlier that 31 other teams are trying to win a superbowl as well. Hell, most franchises haven't won one in their franchise's history. We've been largely in the conversation of contender for a while now due to how TT constructs this team. I think the shortcomings the past few years have been more on the players underperforming/choking than the failure of the FO to field a good team. I personally love having a young team that I know will be in the hunt year in and year out. All it takes is the players to perform the way they're capable of for us to win another Super Bowl, unfortunately the past few years they've underperformed when it mattered most.

 

[swhitset]

Yeah, I agree with the point someone made earlier that 31 other teams are trying to win a superbowl as well. Hell, most franchises haven't won one in their franchise's history. We've been largely in the conversation of contender for a while now due to how TT constructs this team. I think the shortcomings the past few years have been more on the players underperforming/choking than the failure of the FO to field a good team. I personally love having a young team that I know will be in the hunt year in and year out. All it takes is the players to perform the way they're capable of for us to win another Super Bowl, unfortunately the past few years they've underperformed when it mattered most.

I mostly agree with this, however, I think there is some middle ground. Winning a Super Bowl always involves some luck no matter how good the team is. No matter how well the team on the field performs, injuries, phantom penalties, strength of schedule and many other things come to play. Which is why, I have to say that while I generally like Thompson's approach to team building, that " luck factor" seems to require a little bit of risk taking at times. At some point in all of this team building a GM needs to say "let's go for it this year" I'm not sure Thompson ever gets to that point...

 

[OCBP]

You are not even close on the Pro Bowlers. Sitton, Jennings, Peppers, Collins, Lacy, Cobb, Jordy, Raji, Shields, Tramon Williams were all Pro Bowlers.

I clearly get you're not a TT fan, but at least be accurate when arguing against him.

All Pro not Pro Bowl. Do you understand the difference?

 

[Carl]

All Pro not Pro Bowl. Do you understand the difference?

Yes, I understand the difference. If you were talking about All Pro players, you probably should have said, "All Pro" instead of "Pro Bowl."

 

[gonzozab]

Yeah, I agree with the point someone made earlier that 31 other teams are trying to win a superbowl as well. Hell, most franchises haven't won one in their franchise's history. We've been largely in the conversation of contender for a while now due to how TT constructs this team. I think the shortcomings the past few years have been more on the players underperforming/choking than the failure of the FO to field a good team. I personally love having a young team that I know will be in the hunt year in and year out. All it takes is the players to perform the way they're capable of for us to win another Super Bowl, unfortunately the past few years they've underperformed when it mattered most.

Without Rodgers, none of the last eight teams even sniff the playoffs. History proves it.

On a side note, I'm not satisfied with just winning the division every year and an early exit from the playoffs. That might fly in Minnesota but in Green Bay, the name of the game is Lombardi trophies. I want to be Miss America, not Miss Congeniality, and if Ted continues to be stubborn and refuses to even be the least bit flexible in his philosophy, there will be no more under his tenure.

 

[Jerellh528]

Without Rodgers, none of the last eight teams even sniff the playoffs. History proves it.

On a side note, I'm not satisfied with just winning the division every year and an early exit from the playoffs. That might fly in Minnesota but in Green Bay, the name of the game is Lombardi trophies. I want to be Miss America, not Miss Congeniality, and if Ted continues to be stubborn and refuses to even be the least bit flexible in his philosophy, there will be no more under his tenure.

Yeah I dunno. I think we're pretty talented as a whole. Our wr corps is top notch, we have a beastly rb, a top 10 line even without sitton I can see it go no lower than top 10, we have one of the best secondaries in the league with an ascending star in haha, and a monster on the dline with Daniels, a premiere outside backer in clay, and a legend win pep. I don't think there are too many teams as complete as us. we can't have pro bowlers at every position. Just my opinion, but I think the team as a whole is solid and built to contend around Rodgers. With no Rodgers maybe it's built a different way. We haven't seen this team play with another good starting quality qb, we've seen it with the likes of Matt Flynn lol. Just my opinion though, but I think people take it too far when they say we're sucky without Rodgers, obviously Rodgers is a big part of our success, but I think roster for roster, our team stacks up well vs the majority of the league.