How many more?

[digsthepack]

We truly have reached the saturation point of the "I want it all now" mindset...full grown adults operating in the ID...something that should have been outgrown many years ago.

GMs deal with many personalities (many unpleasant and unpredictable ones to be sure) and millions of dollars...... and some folks act as if they are trading a couple cat's eyes for a steelie.

We saw the result of rash GM decisions for the last 3 years...and how it hurt this team.... and now many of you want the new GM to make the same rushed decisions that hurt us for much of the last regime's tenure.

Solid plan!

 

[Bruce]

Mike Reinfeldt is the Vice President of Football Administration in Seattle??

So why would he say that if it was not true..Wouldnt giving false information out get him in trouble with Holmgren??

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=389230

"On the day before the draft, Thompson informed Reinfeldt that he was targeting Alexander at 19 and McIntosh at 22. The Seahawks got whom they wanted."

I read the article when it was written and I know who Mike Reinfeldt is. What did you expect him to say, "Ted Thompson is an idiot?" Mike H is not Mike R's boss and he was responding to questions from a writer putting together a nice fluffy "Ted is the Greatest" article.

Do you seriously believe that Mike Holmgen (a control freak if ever their was one) who was President and GM at the time, simply said, Oh I'll just hand it over to Ted Thompson and go with whatever he says?" If so I have some nice highland in South Florida I would like to sell you along with some Ocean front in Kansas.

Ted Thompson was a member of the team that targeted Alexander (a great pick) and McIntosh (a terrible pick). He deserves props for that and I give it to him for that. He did not become GM of the Packers because he is an idiot. He knows football and has a solid football mind. My fear is he has been promoted beyond his competence to the level of his incompetence in the step to GM. I hope I am wrong, but do not see anything that is instilling great confidence in his performance to date.

 

[Bruce]

Gosh....I just hate when facts get in the way of some people's rants.

You would know an awful lot about that wouldn't you digs? Personally I appreciate facts and like to sort them from opinion, but that is not something that seems to be your strong suit.

 

[Bruce]

This is classic! Give me names Joe McCarthy. Who wants Ted Thompson to make rash decisions? Talk about factless rants.

We truly have reached the saturation point of the "I want it all now" mindset...full grown adults operating in the ID...something that should have been outgrown many years ago.

GMs deal with many personalities (many unpleasant and unpredictable ones to be sure) and millions of dollars...... and some folks act as if they are trading a couple cat's eyes for a steelie.

We saw the result of rash GM decisions for the last 3 years...and how it hurt this team.... and now many of you want the new GM to make the same rushed decisions that hurt us for much of the last regime's tenure.

Solid plan!

 

[digsthepack]

Well...spending money just because you have it THIS year...as so many are calling for. sets you up for cash shortfalls in coming years. $7 million per year for Hutchinson? Foolish spending....and yet many wish we would have spent it. $5 million a year for the one dimensional Archuleta...and yet some were screaming when he was not signed.

Read the board, Bruce. Half this joint wants to **** it all away this year simply because it is there....not a wise move if history is any indication.

 

[hoos]

What's the point of keeping all this cap money and not spending it on anybody? I don't buy this we'll screw up the future of our cap, we have enough money to frontload contracts.

I'm not saying we should sign every FA out there, but at least take a chance on someone.

 

[digsthepack]

Hey...if you can do a series of one year deals, fine. But who wants to lock up all that money this year when the next couple off-seasons may hold the key to a SB run? I am quite sure the team is VERY aware of who will be coming free ion the next year or two...something that most of us do not.

Why not build incrementally...blow it all this year and many of the players signed may not even be around for the ultimate goal that is the SB....which would make their signing a waste. Put the pieces in place predominately through the draft, flesh out with FAs to put over the top...maintain a cash reserve to pull in the lynchpin players necessary WHEN THE TEAM IS READY TO MAKE THAT ASCENT..which is NOT this year.

 

[warhawk]

Well...spending money just because you have it THIS year...as so many are calling for. sets you up for cash shortfalls in coming years. $7 million per year for Hutchinson? Foolish spending....and yet many wish we would have spent it. $5 million a year for the one dimensional Archuleta...and yet some were screaming when he was not signed.

Read the board, Bruce. Half this joint wants to **** it all away this year simply because it is there....not a wise move if history is any indication.

What must also be considered is what position these signing would put us in cap wise in the next few years. We have several players under some pretty good sized contracts now and when most often the contract price goes up as years go by some accountability needs to be considered.

We are not going to be $30 million under the cap every year. Remember, we have NO running backs under contract after this year and AR is due considerably more next year than this for example.

So we go off and sign some big contracts and get strapped next year cap wise. This would not be very smart. We know we are more than a couple of big names from being a formadable team.

Not being in a position to add quality in future years would not be good.

This is what teams like Washington have done. They have over mortgaged the house. They better win right now cause down the road it's not pretty.

 

[warhawk]

Digs,
I also agree about the June cuts scenario. I posted earlier if Brett wants to wait until he see's the moves made and decide if they clearly will make a difference in the quality of players on this team he needs to wait until after then.
Nor do I think you can dismiss the draft as a means of obtaining players that will make a difference year one. Very few years do we not see rookies that step in a make this team better.

And in a year when we are in a better position than we have been in many years and fortunate to be looking at a strong draft there is no reason to think we won't see some players making big contributions next year.

We still have what's left of FA, the draft coming up, and, June cuts before we really know what players will be taking the field this fall.

 

[pyledriver80]

First off, you are not going to get FA to agree to 1 Year contracts when others are offering 4-5 year deals. If I was Arrington I would definitely want a longer term deal considering he has to question his own ability somewhat, following his injury and lack of production.

You guys want to Gamble, period. You want to sign questionable players and try to INSURE them by setting up contracts that give the Packers "outs". You are not going to get players to do that, they are looking for security, as any of us would.


If you want these "BIG NAME" guys you got to commit to them by putting your future in jeopardy. You can't have your cake and eat it to.

I think some of you must learn that the NFL is a Marathon and not a track meet.

 

[Zero2Cool]

Are we still talking about the following...

Lavar doesn't sign with GB, one of the reasons:

The Packers were hoping to lure Arrington to Green Bay with a solid contract offer and from all indications they were in the running until the end. But the uncertainty of not having a decision from Brett Favre on his status for next season might have affected Arrington's decision.

So much for the "Bretts indecision is NOT affecting free agency" arguments.

I wish Brett could take all the time he wanted, as long as it didnt affect the team. The packers. The Green Bay Packers.

The truth is, and it is becoming more clear as every day passes, his indecision IS affecting free agency.

"But TT and MM said it isn't!" Well...it is. It couldn't be more obvious than it is right now.

The questions I have are, how many other possible free agents decided to go elsewhere because of favres indecision, and how many more will do it in the future?


I love favre, regardless of what some tools here will say. He is my favorite QB of all time. He needs to make a decision soon. He is already getting a pass to pretty much decide after the draft. he needs to decide shortly after. He will see where the team is headed then, and will have a good idea of what the 2006 team will be like. He needs to make a decision for the Green Bay Packers.

 

[digsthepack]

My whole point is that the "big names" are rarely worth the big bucks they sign for out of the desperation of some franchises. And no, I know that most would not sign the one year deal.

The spending spree that some advocate is like shooting your *** before the first kiss.....premature and unsatisfying....leaving one wanting for more but with little "ammo" to play with.

 

[P@ck66]

Hey...if you can do a series of one year deals, fine. But who wants to lock up all that money this year when the next couple off-seasons may hold the key to a SB run? I am quite sure the team is VERY aware of who will be coming free ion the next year or two...something that most of us do not.

Why not build incrementally...blow it all this year and many of the players signed may not even be around for the ultimate goal that is the SB....which would make their signing a waste. Put the pieces in place predominately through the draft, flesh out with FAs to put over the top...maintain a cash reserve to pull in the lynchpin players necessary WHEN THE TEAM IS READY TO MAKE THAT ASCENT..which is NOT this year.

Well digs..

I have to respectfully tell you that this is a steaming pile of ********...and this is the crux of the problem right here...

(I know you have problems with Favre returning...)

But many of us here on this forum believe that if you surround Brett Favre with high quality receiving talent...an O-Line that can pass protect..and a respectible running game..that the Pack can compete for the SB RIGHT NOW..with Favre at the helm...

Why should we put all of our trust in TT and wait years to see if his almighty "plan" will work out when we have Favre this year..(and if TT played his card right) possibly next year....? What if it doesn't work out?

Who's going to lead the Pack to the SB in 3-4 years...which is what TT is planning for....Aaron Rodgers..???

(Sorry..but I'd put my money on Favre before I'd lay it down on unproven individuals like TT and Rodgers...)

This is why many Packer fans are pissed off....It's the way that TT is handling Favre.....you can't deny it!

 

[musccy]

Stop turning this into a "TT hates the Brett, the Packers, and puppies" scenario

who are the O-linemen that TT is supposed to bring in right now? The Pack need 3 interior linemen, so you need to come up with a better answer than just hutchinson.

As for wrs and rbs, I think the pack are fine. JW HAS to come back this year...imagine how much $$$ he'd get on the market with a resume that said "last 2 years, ACL injury, and sat out so I could pout" Diver and JW proved to be a very worthy duo in 2004, as they will in 2006

As for Rbs, all 3 on the roster have proven at some time to be very compotent backs...the pack just needs one to step up.

 

[DePack]

How about Mike Flanagan and Mike Wahle?

 

[musccy]

Flanny was dramatically slipping, and the packers didn't have the $$$ for wahle

Digs is right about big names...how many years in a row did Snyder/redskins go for broke, or look what Minny did the last few offseasons...what do they have to show for it?!?

 

[Zero2Cool]

Flanny was dramatically slipping, and the packers didn't have the $$$ for wahle

Digs is right about big names...how many years in a row did Snyder/redskins go for broke, or look what Minny did the last few offseasons...what do they have to show for it?!?

ESPN predicting winning seasons for them???

 

[musccy]

exactly zero...those teams have been paper champions for years now...many even predicted the vikes to make the sb last year...

A few big names can and has worked...but a phantom tricep injury, and the 36 mil you put into Joe Johnson becomes useless...and could have been better spent on 3 or 4 other quality players.

 

[musccy]

exactly zero...those teams have been paper champions for years now...many even predicted the vikes to make the sb last year...

A few big names can and has worked...but a phantom tricep injury, and the 36 mil you put into Joe Johnson becomes useless...and could have been better spent on 3 or 4 other quality players.

 

[DePack]

Flanny was dramatically slipping, and the packers didn't have the $$$ for wahle

Digs is right about big names...how many years in a row did Snyder/redskins go for broke, or look what Minny did the last few offseasons...what do they have to show for it?!?

"One of the players I am targeting to re-sign is Mike Flanagan"...Ted Thompson


Why would he want to re-sign him if he was slipping?

 

[P@ck66]

Don't you know DePack..

That was the genius of TT using reverse psychology.....If he seemed interested in him....he knew some team sign him (and as some people here say.."throw the bank at him"..), which is really what TT wanted because he didn't want him...

Don't you get it?

 

[musccy]

Flanny has had some fairly substantial knee injuries the last few years, he's about 31 or 32, he's not getting any faster, Wells has proved to be at least on his heels, if not better...I'm not too upset about losing him

I'm not saying Wells is necessarily the golden ticket either, but I don't see the pack droping w/ wells in there. Still need 2 guards, though I'm not sure where TT should have got them from to this point.

 

[bozz_2006]

He should have picked up some ****ing guards in free agency! he's the reason that Favre is retiring this off-season. it's all ted's fault. *What? hold on a sec... He is?* did you guys know favre is coming back? TT is a genius!

 

[PWT36]

Depack-The money that Houston Oilers paid Mike Flanagan was very nice last contract before retirement.
I believe Packers GM Ted Thompson thought the contract that Houston Texans gave
Flanagan was over the market value of Mike Flanagan , a 33 old veteran center going into his 11 year in NFL with history of past injuries. As Ted Thompson is known for not signing players he thinks are asking over market value for their services.

Mike Flanagan was drafted 3a in 1996 out of UCLA He was on IR for 1996 & 1997 and played in 2 games in 1998. The Green Bay Packer stuck with him for those three years and Mike Flanagan rewarded the Packer for the long wait by becoming a excellent center.

In 1999 took over the center postion ( played 15 games )from Center Jeff Dellenbach and was Packer center. Played all 16 games in 2000,2001,2002,2003, and was injured during 2004 and returned in '05 and played in pain most of season because he felt the troubled Packer O line needed him.

Every Packer fan should thank Mike Flanagan for his great service to the Green Bay Packers and wish him good luck with the Houston Texans.

I am sure Mike Flanagan understands this was business decison by the Packers (just as he made a business decison) made in this era of Free agency and Salary cap, and this has happened many times with all NFL franchises.

I know Mike Flanagan appreciated that The Packers stood behind him in those first two years in 1996 & 1997 when he was on IR, and has said so publically.

 

[DePack]

This market value crap is nonsense.

Fair Market Value by definition is what someone is willing to pay a guy. Thompson wasn't willing to pay him "fair market value". It's that simple. Maybe he shouldn't but don't tell me there was noone out there for him to get.