Rajion Neal

[Mondio]

Wolf 's tenure began with the onset of free agency and the salary cap. Maybe not such a valid comparison since Thompson does not participate in free agency.

you're right, Thompson has never signed a FA, except he has, even ones not originally with this team. Wolf didn't do anything within the current constraints of the the salary cap, in fact he got out as soon as he saw the writing on the wall. It was an entirely different beast at the outset than it is today. Ask him, he'll tell you. Because he was great then doesn't diminish what Thompson has done now just like Bart Starr winning all those championships doesn't mean Rodgers or Favre are poor QB 's because they only have 1.

Like I said, 1 fan base in the past decade I'd even consider switching with, I think he's doing better than OK.

 

[Half Empty]

OK, since the "what do we mean by a free agent?" discussion has run it's course, how about something along the lines of "because of his first draft choice, TT was set, regardless of approach"?

 

[PackerDNA]

OK, since the "what do we mean by a free agent?" discussion has run it's course, how about something along the lines of "because of his first draft choice, TT was set, regardless of approach"?

Interesting....
Anyways, I'm putting together a thread/poll that I hope will make some crucial points in the TT discussions;should be some fun for all.

 

[longtimefan]

Again, the point I - and I believe Captain WIMM and others make- is that Thompson does not use free agency and trades nearly as much as he could or should. And if he doesn't get off his hands and do so more than he's comfortable with in the next 2 off seasons, this team will take a step or two back. It will become a numbers game , and even hitting on an inordinately high percentage of draft picks, he won't be able to staunch all the bleeding.
Shawnsta3 does a great job- thanks for the time and effort. But face it gang, that's a pretty short and thin on talent list , especially considering the guy's in his 11th season as GM. He doesn't begin to compare to Wolf in activity or effectiveness. The argument that resigning your own players who's contracts are ending is free agency activity is a real stretch.
Even the ""technically" argument is shaky when you consider how many of those own free agents had resigned or agreed to contracts before they "technically"even became free agents?
The guy does not use 'all the tools in the toolbox'. I would submit that that is a form of dereliction of duty. If as a Marine

I am agreeing with you in Ted doesnt do enough.

But when Cobb and Bulaga were getting offers from other teams but decided to re-sign with GB, that still should count...We just differ on that technicality of it..

As far as Wolf being better, again we just disagree on what is better...No one is right and no one is wrong..


Wolf
92-2000
92–52 record.. 6 straight playoffs.
2 SB in a row--3 title games in a row..Wolf's team played to their potential and didn't slip up when it counted.

Ted 2005-2015... 6 straight playoffs
98-61 record--this is with Rodgers missing 8 games?
1 SB- 3 title games...Brett had a horrible title game and if played up to his potential they would have went to the SB...And everyone knows they should have went last year...

The true point of that is Ted's hand gave the coaches the talent needed to get to the SB....Can't lay it all on Ted for those two NFCCG losses...Isnt that your argument? Ted doesnt get the right players?

Again I am agreeing with you on most counts, just we differ on technicalities of it all

 

[PackerDNA]

I too am in basic agreement with you across the board, Longtimefan. Although I disregard "woulda, coulda, shoulda" in any such discussions.

 

[TJV]

It will become a numbers game , and even hitting on an inordinately high percentage of draft picks, he won't be able to staunch all the bleeding.

I disagree. If he hits on an “inordinately high percentage of draft picks” it will staunch the bleeding. I think the issue is the likelihood of that and relying almost entirely on the draft. And if an inordinately high percentage of the players acquired in the past couple of years continue to develop in dramatic fashion that’ll help too. But again, it’s relying almost entirely on that, that argues for participating more in free agency.

OK, since the "what do we mean by a free agent?" discussion has run it's course, how about something along the lines of "because of his first draft choice, TT was set, regardless of approach"?

First, most of this season provides evidence that's not true - Rodgers needs players around him, just like every other QB. Second - just using you as an example (if I remember correctly) - for those who have posted here the only thing that matters is titles, HOFer Wolf and Thompson are tied.

Regarding woulda shoulda coulda, IMO it is applicable when assessing the talent provided by the GM and his staff and that's why I think LTF has a valid point regarding the team Thompson put on the field in 2007 and last season. The GM can only provide the tools and I think Thompson did his job in those seasons.

And another thing about Rajion Neal...

 

[Mondio]

I too am in basic agreement with you across the board, Longtimefan. Although I disregard "woulda, coulda, shoulda" in any such discussions.

So that pretty much renders this discussion and any position you have moot. Because you obviously disregard what "coulda" happened if TT "woulda" got another free agent and the Packers "shoulda" won more

Happy thanksgiving everyone

 

[PackerDNA]

No Mondio, it's in regards to the implication that you should have more titles because you should have or could have won games that in reality you lost. No points made in any discussion on free agency in general or TT's role in it are affected since their completely different points and subjects.
But then you probably knew that before you took your shot.

 

[longtimefan]

No Mondio, it's in regards to the implication that you should have more titles because you should have or could have won games that in reality you lost. No points made in any discussion on free agency in general or TT's role in it are affected since their completely different points and subjects.
But then you probably knew that before you took your shot.

Do you blame Ted for title game losses, coaches and players

 

[PackerDNA]

TJV, you're right about using such things in discussions on TT's methods and such.
The point others seem to want to make is we could have more titles because we should have won some other games. It's looking to inflate Thompson's accomplishments when there is no would, coulda shoulda if you lost the games.

 

[PackerDNA]

Do you blame Ted for title game losses, coaches and players

No, on field losses are on players and coaches. Thompson's failures to aquire enough talent- in large part because of his refusal to fulfill all his obligations as a GM in accomplishing that- is on him.

 

[Mondio]

No Mondio, it's in regards to the implication that you should have more titles because you should have or could have won games that in reality you lost. No points made in any discussion on free agency in general or TT's role in it are affected since their completely different points and subjects.
But then you probably knew that before you took your shot.

I see, woulda coulda shoulda is only a valid topic of discussion when you'd like it to be. You're all too happy to assume that things are better in Green Bay if Thompson woulda,coulda, shoulda, did what you wanted him too.

 

[TJV]

TJV, you're right about using such things in discussions on TT's methods and such. The point others seem to want to make is we could have more titles because we should have won some other games. It's looking to inflate Thompson's accomplishments when there is no would, coulda shoulda if you lost the games.

I'm not sure how to reconcile saying I'm right about using such things regarding Thompson's performance and then contradicting it: "Regarding woulda shoulda coulda, IMO it is applicable when assessing the talent provided by the GM and his staff and that's why I think LTF has a valid point regarding the team Thompson put on the field in 2007 and last season. The GM can only provide the tools and I think Thompson did his job in those seasons." As LTF posted and I assume you agree: A GM can do his job of providing personnel exceptionally and the coaching staff and/or players could screw up leading the team to a loss. Particularly see last year's NFCCG: How do you put that 4 minute collapse on Thompson's talent acquisition skills?

 

[PackerDNA]

I see, woulda coulda shoulda is only a valid topic of discussion when you'd like it to be. You're all too happy to assume that things are better in Green Bay if Thompson woulda,coulda, shoulda, did what you wanted him too.

Why don't you just read what people post instead of trying to reinterpret everything to fit what you want it to be? Don't know what I'm getting at? Ask.

 

[PackerDNA]

True TJV, but not quite what I'm going for here. Woulda-coulda-shoulda is a fantasy; loser's lament. The reality is they couldn't get it done on the field, and they lost. A discussion after the game on what went wrong , where and what could have been done instead make for great talks.
But in Thompson's case , he is negligent because he doesn't use all methods available to him . The idea of trying to pump up TT's record because we came thisclose on other occasions in which they failed to close the deal isn't one I subscribe to.

 

[PackerDNA]

Well, gotta run for now; quick stop at the store and on to dinner with some friends.
To each and everyone here, your loved ones and friends, a very Happy Thanksgiving!

 

[Mondio]

Why don't you just read what people post instead of trying to reinterpret everything to fit what you want it to be? Don't know what I'm getting at? Ask.

Ok, I'll ask

What is your assertion the difference I GB would be if Thompson took your advice? I assume you're thinking it would be different ,but maybe I need you to spell it out. I'd hate to misinterpret you. But by asserting things would be better, or different, you are playing in the realm of what everyone else is.

If Ted Thompson spent x dollars on free agent B.... If Green Bay made one more play last January.....

 

[longtimefan]

No, on field losses are on players and coaches. Thompson's failures to aquire enough talent- in large part because of his refusal to fulfill all his obligations as a GM in accomplishing that- is on him.

Ted got the talent for 3 title games-- that's what I think you agree too.

So losing two title games is on and coaches and players. I think your saying that too.



If those are correct isn't your point flawed?

 

[Poppa San]

Free agents as they could sign with anyone..
Next time say free agents from other teams

Or you could consider expanding the congealed creaky crusty corners of your cranium to consider the concept that it is implied to be other team free agents when this subject is discussed. Technicalities and dotted i's and crossed t's is not a requirement here. Brevity reigns when passion is involved. Saves a few electrons for more important things like strobe lights at gentlemen's clubs too.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

Oh sorry, I thought this thread was about Rajion Neal ??

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think 2014 fa was odd as you could negotiate with players before the true time hit.

The NFL introduced the three day negotiating period in 2013 and has been using it since every year.

 

[PackerDNA]

To answer the basic point - this started for me with (was it?) Longtimefan that TT's accomplishments were mathematically equal to Wolf's because they coulda/woulda/shoulda won NFC title games in 07 and 14. At least that was my interpretation.
I don't always make my points well enough in print, and if others disagree with me, I'm fine with that.
There is no woulda/coulda/shoulda; it is the loser's last refuge. there is only reality and results. The Packers had they're chances, and couldn't close the deal; they failed they lost, period.
Until- and I blame me for it- this went off the rails, that was my point, and for me, that, with all due respect to those of you who took the time to engage me on it, is the end of it for me.
Hopefully- despite the game- you all had a great Thanksgiving. Now, get your wallets ready for the Super Bowl of spending in 4 weeks.

 

[Half Empty]

Oh sorry, I thought this thread was about Rajion Neal ??

It used to be, but this is a lot more fun.

 

[TJV]

To answer the basic point - this started for me with (was it?) Longtimefan that TT's accomplishments were mathematically equal to Wolf's because they coulda/woulda/shoulda won NFC title games in 07 and 08. At least that was my interpretation. ... There is no woulda/coulda/shoulda; it is the loser's last refuge. there is only reality and results. The Packers had they're chances, and couldn't close the deal; they failed they lost, period.

(It was 2007 and last year, not 2008 - they finished 6-10 in '08.)

What I think you are missing is dividing the responsibilities of the GM to provide the talent, the coaching staff, and the players. For example, a GM could provide the coaching staff with the best roster in the league and the coaching staff could completely screw that team up. The overall result may stink, but the GM did a great job with regard to talent acquisition. (As painful as it is) Look at last year’s NFCCG. The team collapsed in the last four minutes. Overall that stunk. But with regard to the roster and Thompson’s talent acquisition skills, I think he did a very good job, otherwise the Packers would not have been in control of that game for 56 minutes in perhaps the most hostile road environment in the NFL. To me it's clear Thompson provided the coaching staff with the talent to win that game.

For a more concrete example, the 1958 Packers finished 1-10-1. The next year they went 7-5, their first winning season in twelve years. The only significant contributor from the 1959 draft was Boyd Dowler. The change of course was the arrival of Vince Lombardi. IMO it’s obvious Jack Vainisi was doing his job providing talent and the coaching staffs weren’t doing theirs.

 

[PackerDNA]

I edited that, TJV. Really not what I was
going for, but no argument on your points.
I'd like to take the opportunity to thank you for your appreciation of Jack Vainisi. It makes me sad to know how few people remember him and appreciate the huge role he played in bringing about the golden years of Packer football.