John Dorsey to take over for Ted Thompson?

[Deleted member 6794]

I would expect Ted's MO to be different if Rodgers wasn't behind center.

I don't believe Thompson would be capable of completely changing his MO, running the team in a significantly different way even if the Packers didn't have Rodgers as their franchise quarterback.

 

[AmishMafia]

There's no way Thompson should be considered the best general manager in the league. While a lot of teams would like to be as successful as the Packers have been over the past 12 years the ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl, not having the potential to.



I understand Thompson's MO but just happen to not agree with it. Rodgers is the main reason the Packers have played at a high level over the past eight seasons though.

If there was a simple way to guarrantee a SB win, everyone would do it. After that, there is only potential. And TT has been better than anyone at putting the Packers in a competitive talent level than any one else.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And TT has been better than anyone at putting the Packers in a competitive talent level than any one else.

It's entirely possible Schneider, Dorsey or McKenzie would have been more successful over the past few years running the Packers than Thompson.

 

[AmishMafia]

It's entirely possible Schneider, Dorsey or McKenzie would have been more successful over the past few years running the Packers than Thompson.

Or that they would have failed miserably having to draft at the end of the rounds instead of earlier.

 

[sschind]

If there was a simple way to guarrantee a SB win, everyone would do it. After that, there is only potential. And TT has been better than anyone at putting the Packers in a competitive talent level than any one else.

I get your point but "better than anyone"? Aren't you forgetting that Bill guy in New England.

There's no way Thompson should be considered the best general manager in the league. While a lot of teams would like to be as successful as the Packers have been over the past 12 years the ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl, not having the potential to.

I don't think he is the best GM in the league but he is in the top 10, maybe top 5. It remains to be seen how guys like McKenzie (and last week I would have said Dorsey) and a few others last.

Ted has COLLAPSED the best O-Line in the league...TWICE. He is the ONLY GM to have a team go 15-1 in the regular season and lose a playoff game at home in their first playoff game. He has lost TWO NFC Championships in humiliating fashion. This is Titletown, USA not Verygoodville, or Getstotheplayoffsland. We need an upgrade!

Reminds me of Owen Wilson's the line from "Shanghai Noon" "that's a terrible cowboy name"

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Or that they would have failed miserably having to draft at the end of the rounds instead of earlier.

That's possible as well but with the Packers not even having been to a Super Bowl over the last six seasons I have a hard time believing no other general manager could have done a better job than Thompson.

I don't think he is the best GM in the league but he is in the top 10, maybe top 5. It remains to be seen how guys like McKenzie (and last week I would have said Dorsey) and a few others last.

Thompson was definitely one of the best general managers in the league early during his tenure, culminating in the Packers winning the Super Bowl six years ago. I'm not convinced he has been better than average since though.

 

[AmishMafia]

I get your point but "better than anyone"? Aren't you forgetting that Bill guy in New England

Yes, he may be better, but I think he is a better coach than a GM. NE had a 9 year haitus from SB wins. They even missed the playoffs a few time in his tenure despite playing in a fairly weak division. But just about every year over the past 7 or 8 seasons, the Packers are considered one of the most talented teams in the NFL. TT has done an excellent job of keeping them competitively talented over this period.

 

[Half Empty]

I would gladly accept a 9 year run of not winning a SB if it meant that I could sandwich that period with three wins before and two after, not to mention appearing in two more during the 'drought'. The Pats have won more this century than the Pack has total. In that period, the Pack has one more win than the Browns, Bears, et. al.

 

[AmishMafia]

I would gladly accept a 9 year run of not winning a SB if it meant that I could sandwich that period with three wins before and two after, not to mention appearing in two more during the 'drought'. The Pats have won more this century than the Pack has total. In that period, the Pack has one more win than the Browns, Bears, et. al.

As would I.

SB losses don't count to many here. All that matters is a SB win. New England's best team, when they signed Moss, they went undefeated in the regular season. Waltzed into the SB, and got crushed by the Giants. Therefore it was a wasted season and Belicheck was incompetent.

My point was that over that period, the Packers were consistently strong every year.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Yes, he may be better, but I think he is a better coach than a GM. NE had a 9 year haitus from SB wins. They even missed the playoffs a few time in his tenure despite playing in a fairly weak division.

The Patriots have missed the playoffs once over the past 15 seasons. That was in 2008 when Brady was lost for the season in week 1 and New England still managed to win 11 games.

In addition while the AFC East is for some reason considered a weak division their teams lead the league in winning percentage against other ones since the current realignment took place in 2002.

 

[AmishMafia]

The Patriots have missed the playoffs once over the past 15 seasons. That was in 2008 when Brady was lost for the season in week 1 and New England still managed to win 11 games.

In addition while the AFC East is for some reason considered a weak division their teams lead the league in winning percentage against other ones since the current realignment took place in 2002.

Okay. But the fact is, TT has not gone 9 straight years without winning a superbowl.

 

[sschind]

Okay. But the fact is, TT has not gone 9 straight years without winning a superbowl.

Another fact is that he hasn't won 5 of them either.

Ted Thompson has been the GM of the Packers for 12 years. They have made the playoffs 9 of those 12 years including the last 8. They have won 1 Superbowl in that time and lost 3 NFCC games

Bill Belichick has been the GM of the New England Patriots for 17 years. They have made the playoffs 14 of those 17 years including the last 8. In that time they have won 5 Super Bowls and lost 2. If you want to compare just the time that TT has been in GB then BB has been to the playoffs 11 time with 1 SB win and 1 Loss along with 4 NFCC losses.

No, Ted hasn't gone 9 straight years without winning a SB but he has gone 6. I'd give the nod to BB no matter how you slice it.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Okay. But the fact is, TT has not gone 9 straight years without winning a superbowl.

That's an extremely lame attempt at trying to build a case for Thompson being a better general manager than Belichick as BB having won five Super Bowls while TT has managed only one is the only fact that matters.

If you want to compare just the time that TT has been in GB then BB has been to the playoffs 11 time with 1 SB win and 1 Loss along with 4 NFCC losses.

Belichick has actually won two Super Bowls (XLIX, LI) and lost another two to the Giants in 2007 and '11 since Thompson took over 12 years ago.

 

[PikeBadger]

Imo, This seems to come down to some thing similar to arguing the merits of Lombardi vs. Landry and Shula. Just because Lombardi was the greatest of his generation doesn't mean that Landry, Shula, Stram, Halas and Grant sucked.

 

[AmishMafia]

Another fact is that he hasn't won 5 of them either.

Ted Thompson has been the GM of the Packers for 12 years. They have made the playoffs 9 of those 12 years including the last 8. They have won 1 Superbowl in that time and lost 3 NFCC games

Bill Belichick has been the GM of the New England Patriots for 17 years. They have made the playoffs 14 of those 17 years including the last 8. In that time they have won 5 Super Bowls and lost 2. If you want to compare just the time that TT has been in GB then BB has been to the playoffs 11 time with 1 SB win and 1 Loss along with 4 NFCC losses.

No, Ted hasn't gone 9 straight years without winning a SB but he has gone 6. I'd give the nod to BB no matter how you slice it.

But Bilicheck got lucky that Brady fell in the draft , , ,

I am just kidding. Clearly NE has been more successful than the Packers over the last era. Personally, I attribute that to Belicheck the coach and not Belicheck the GM. Cant think of the last player that they lost in FA who went on to excell. Yet they pick up FAs who do better for Belicheck. The man is a master at game planning and scheming to individual players.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Imo, This seems to come down to some thing similar to arguing the merits of Lombardi vs. Landry and Shula. Just because Lombardi was the greatest of his generation doesn't mean that Landry, Shula, Stram, Halas and Grant sucked.

Just to clarify, once again, there's absolutely no doubt Thompson has been successful over his tenure with the Packers. On the other hand he hasn't been the best general manager over that period by any means though.

 

[sschind]

Belichick has actually won two Super Bowls (XLIX, LI) and lost another two to the Giants in 2007 and '11 since Thompson took over 12 years ago.

You are right. Thanks for the correction, I don't know how I missed it. Its not like I had to peruse 50 years of stats. You know, as I was typing those numbers (1 win and 1 loss) I was thinking their records are a lot closer than I thought since Ted took over the Packers. It just didn't seem right and now I know why, it wasn't.

But Bilicheck got lucky that Brady fell in the draft , , ,

I am just kidding. Clearly NE has been more successful than the Packers over the last era. Personally, I attribute that to Belicheck the coach and not Belicheck the GM. Cant think of the last player that they lost in FA who went on to excell. Yet they pick up FAs who do better for Belicheck. The man is a master at game planning and scheming to individual players.

Now that was funny. You might even say he got much more lucky than Thompson since Rodgers only fell 24 spots and Brady fell 199.

Your argument attributing much of the Patriots success to BB the coach as opposed to BB the GM certainly is legit. There is no doubt he has developed into one of the best coaches in NFL history. I also think there is some merit to the comment someone made earlier (it may have been you) that it may be easier to coach players that you yourself brought in, and perhaps it might even be easier to bring in players you know you will be coaching. In an ideal world I think having the same man doing both duties would be great but its far from an ideal world and there are very few Bill Belichicks out there. There may be a few more out there who could do both but I don't think we will see very many getting the chance. Consensus seems to be that there is just too much involved in each job to be able do both well.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

In an ideal world I think having the same man doing both duties would be great but its far from an ideal world and there are very few Bill Belichicks out there. There may be a few more out there who could do both but I don't think we will see very many getting the chance. Consensus seems to be that there is just too much involved in each job to be able do both well.

The Packers learned the hard way that it's extremely tough to handle both duties with Mike Sherman. While Belichick has done a masterful job as the Patriots general manager and head coach I don't believe there are a lot of people out there capable of managing those enormous responsibilities even close to that well.

 

[AmishMafia]

You are right. Thanks for the correction, I don't know how I missed it. Its not like I had to peruse 50 years of stats. You know, as I was typing those numbers (1 win and 1 loss) I was thinking their records are a lot closer than I thought since Ted took over the Packers. It just didn't seem right and now I know why, it wasn't.




Now that was funny. You might even say he got much more lucky than Thompson since Rodgers only fell 24 spots and Brady fell 199.

Your argument attributing much of the Patriots success to BB the coach as opposed to BB the GM certainly is legit. There is no doubt he has developed into one of the best coaches in NFL history. I also think there is some merit to the comment someone made earlier (it may have been you) that it may be easier to coach players that you yourself brought in, and perhaps it might even be easier to bring in players you know you will be coaching. In an ideal world I think having the same man doing both duties would be great but its far from an ideal world and there are very few Bill Belichicks out there. There may be a few more out there who could do both but I don't think we will see very many getting the chance. Consensus seems to be that there is just too much involved in each job to be able do both well.

The advantage to one GM and hc is you skip the communication with HC in determining the player characteristics desired. The disadvantage, and i think it is huge, is the player/coach relationship gets compromised by the gm/player relationship. You have to encourage a player as a coach and make him confident. Then make him think he think he isn't great during contract negotiations.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The advantage to one GM and hc is you skip the communication with HC in determining the player characteristics desired. The disadvantage, and i think it is huge, is the player/coach relationship gets compromised by the gm/player relationship. You have to encourage a player as a coach and make him confident. Then make him think he think he isn't great during contract negotiations.

While I tend to agree with your point of view it seems Belichick is somehow capable of managing both parts pretty well.

 

[RicFlairoftheNFL]

my point is, there is likely no upgrade available. We already have the best. Most teams wish they had the potential for a NFCCG, let alone the super bowl victory.

I suppose you want to trade Rodgers as well. He did have that midseason slump. That lost our home field playoff advantage. You want to roll the dice and see if Hundly is an upgrade? Afterall this is titletown and not mediocretown . . .

Why the hell not AmishMafia, Ted did that exact damn dumb thing in 2008, and it bit us in the *** for 2 years! Maybe we win another superbowl in 2019?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Why the hell not AmishMafia, Ted did that exact damn dumb thing in 2008, and it bit us in the *** for 2 years!

Did you really just criticize Thompson for sticking with Rodgers in the summer of 2008??? Geez!!!

I would like to use this post as an example to point out that there's a huge difference between someone who actually hates Thompson and believes he can't do anything right like Ric and other members of this forum, like me other several others, that don't agree with every single move made by TT yet at least try to keep an objective perspective analyzing the team's transactions while being well aware he has been mostly successful over his tenure.

 

[AmishMafia]

Why the hell not AmishMafia, Ted did that exact damn dumb thing in 2008, and it bit us in the *** for 2 years! Maybe we win another superbowl in 2019?

Weird. I think we should have dumped Favre 3 years earlier. His constant whining and selfish attitude were a drag on the whole team. Towards the end, nearly the entire team despised him. Some even believe the reason he gave up in the NFCCG against the Giants was jist too spite the team. Why do you think he had his own locker room and didn't associate with any teammates? Because they all thought he was an ***hole, and it is difficult to win a SB let alone have your leader a complete ***hat to his teammates.

Had they gone with Rodgers earlier, I'm not sure if they would have won another SB, I just know he would not have thrown the game because he was cold, tired, and upset that his recent hissy fit with TT didn't get him his way.

 

[El Guapo]

There's no way Thompson should be considered the best general manager in the league. While a lot of teams would like to be as successful as the Packers have been over the past 12 years the ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl, not having the potential to.

Sorry - I've been gone for a while but had to dig this out from the past page. While I agree that TT isn't at the top of the list, I think that one needs to analyze the second statement. The goal of the organization is to win a SB. The job of the GM is to put together players that has the potential to win it. If the Packers are a favorite to do it at the beginning of every season, that means that the "experts" in the media believe that the GM has assembled enough talent to do so.

Most teams would absolutely want a GM that positions their team to be a near-consensus SB contender each year. The coaching staff, players, and football gods have to make the rest happen.

The GM can't win SBs and can't lose NFCC games. He can only put them in position to play the game. The rest is generally out of his control until the following off-season.

 

[El Guapo]

Had they gone with Rodgers earlier, I'm not sure if they would have won another SB, I just know he would not have thrown the game because he was cold, tired, and upset that his recent hissy fit with TT didn't get him his way.

I'll say this about Favre. He worked his butt off in 2007. You're right that there were chemistry issues, but he propelled that team to success without a running game by studying film and working on his mechanics. MM gets uber props for pushing him to do those things.

My hands were numb in overtime of that game. I remember going into the men's room and there were Packers fans sitting in there for warmth. They were too cold and tired but the players were out there. Those players played awesome in an extreme game. I can still hear the crack of pads echoing throughout the stadium. Our defense couldn't stop Plaxico, our O-line couldn't make a hole for Ryan Grant, and Favre made a typical Brett throw at a crucial time. He did it two years later for the Vikings against the Saints. That was Favre being Favre, and nothing more. The guy gutted it out for us despite all of his off-season bs. He played hard and lost. I've never held ill-will for his efforts that day or season.