So, IF we lose the NFCCG next Sunday, then what?

[Packer Brother]

This is a 2 win team without Rodgers. There is not one player besides him you look at and say: " Wow what a great player". Teams don't gameplan around anyone else.

Thompson isn't a terrible GM. He's just not "Great". Pending we lose, l think it's time to move away from TT and into another direction. Although if Baalke is being brought on as a potential TT replacement...stick status quo please.

 

[bigbubbatd]

This is a 2 win team without Rodgers. There is not one player besides him you look at and say: " Wow what a great player". Teams don't gameplan around anyone else.

Thompson isn't a terrible GM. He's just not "Great". Pending we lose, l think it's time to move away from TT and into another direction. Although if Baalke is being brought on as a potential TT replacement...stick status quo please.

What do you mean by game plan around? Jordy was one of the best wrs in the game the past two years he was healthy.

Also the Packers have probably the best pass blocking oline so you can bet teams game plan around that. They have to bring extra guys to get pressure

With Clay regressing there may not be a defender like that although teams most definitely give extra attention to Daniels

 

[bigbubbatd]

While Thompson deserves a ton of credit for drafting Rodgers there's no doubt luck was involved with the pick as well as 21 teams passed on him (Minnesota and Dallas twoce) and no team was interested in trading up as TT listened to trade offers with the Packers already on the clock.



It's absolutely ridiculous to draw a random timeline and ignore the Patriots winning three of the four Super Bowls before the 2005 season.

You may be the best poster here but by the first set of logic every team is lucky for who they draft unless it is the top pick. The Patriots are lucky 4 times as much with Brady.

Why is it ridiculous to pick the current time line? This is a what have you done for me lately league and lately the Patriots have just one super bowl in over a decade with who is considered by many to be the best qb of all time.

I said nothing of how good their gm was before that timeline. Obviously they were amazing. However if your grading system is just super bowl wins and that is what it seems like it is for TT than over the past decade the Patriots have only won one. It must just be super bowl wins because the Packers are in their 4th NFC championship game this decade but that isn't enough

 

[Carl]

Did the Packers already win the NFCCG at Atlanta??? Last time I checked Thompson's teams have only been to one Super Bowl

With the guys I responded to in that post, we were already talking about if they work it this season.

If he wins this season and some people still don't give him some credit for building two Super Bowl teams, that makes no sense. Can't "luck" into a Super Bowl winner, especially not twice.

 

[Half Empty]

You may be the best poster here but by the first set of logic every team is lucky for who they draft unless it is the top pick. The Patriots are lucky 4 times as much with Brady.

Why is it ridiculous to pick the current time line? This is a what have you done for me lately league and lately the Patriots have just one super bowl in over a decade with who is considered by many to be the best qb of all time.

I said nothing of how good their gm was before that timeline. Obviously they were amazing. However if your grading system is just super bowl wins and that is what it seems like it is for TT than over the past decade the Patriots have only won one. It must just be super bowl wins because the Packers are in their 4th NFC championship game this decade but that isn't enough

As far as picking their QBs, TT certainly deserves credit for making the selection when he did, regardless. However, Smith and Rodgers were basically a coin flip for pick #1 and #2, and his freefall to TT's 'lap' was a media event during the draft (my point being, he was a highly regarded QB prospect). Also, Favre was starting to make the noises that tarnished his image with many Pack fans, so it's reasonable to expect he was drafted to replace Brett. Brady, on the other hand, was not a top prospect, and certainly wasn't drafted when he was with a thought toward replacing Bledsoe. The Pats certainly are lucky that he turned out to be the QB he is, but it's difficult to say they were lucky he fell to the 6th round.

I think WIMM has a couple of points in referring to the timeline. One is that leadership in most organizations earns the right to special consideration based on total results, meaning that the 3-for-4 run early in the Belichick/Brady partnership gave them a very long leash. And, while wins are obviously the measuring stick, I don't think you can dismiss the fact that they were in two more SBs, both being "you're never going to see a play like that" losses to the Giants.

 

[bigbubbatd]

As far as picking their QBs, TT certainly deserves credit for making the selection when he did, regardless. However, Smith and Rodgers were basically a coin flip for pick #1 and #2, and his freefall to TT's 'lap' was a media event during the draft (my point being, he was a highly regarded QB prospect). Also, Favre was starting to make the noises that tarnished his image with many Pack fans, so it's reasonable to expect he was drafted to replace Brett. Brady, on the other hand, was not a top prospect, and certainly wasn't drafted when he was with a thought toward replacing Bledsoe. The Pats certainly are lucky that he turned out to be the QB he is, but it's difficult to say they were lucky he fell to the 6th round.

I think WIMM has a couple of points in referring to the timeline. One is that leadership in most organizations earns the right to special consideration based on total results, meaning that the 3-for-4 run early in the Belichick/Brady partnership gave them a very long leash. And, while wins are obviously the measuring stick, I don't think you can dismiss the fact that they were in two more SBs, both being "you're never going to see a play like that" losses to the Giants.

Guess we are going to have to agree to disagree on the Rodgers pick. That was an incredibly ballsy pick by TT than many other guns wouldn't have done. And he nailed it and kept this franchise highly competitive for the next decade.

On the Patriots they are also one play away from having no super bowl wins in the last 11 years. The Packers are terrible Favre throw and an onside kick away from having 2 more appearances. Can't really play the game like that. Heck the Super bowls the Patriots won a few on last second plays or tuck rules.

Also I think the Patriots are the best run nfl organization cheating not withstanding. Not taking anything from their greatness. NY all measures they are one of the only teams better than the Packers over the past decade. Just saying everyone here is rating TT on Super wins. We should rate everyone else on that basis. Since Rodgers has become our qb has any team won more than 1? Nope

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You may be the best poster here but by the first set of logic every team is lucky for who they draft unless it is the top pick. The Patriots are lucky 4 times as much with Brady.

Why is it ridiculous to pick the current time line? This is a what have you done for me lately league and lately the Patriots have just one super bowl in over a decade with who is considered by many to be the best qb of all time.

I said nothing of how good their gm was before that timeline. Obviously they were amazing. However if your grading system is just super bowl wins and that is what it seems like it is for TT than over the past decade the Patriots have only won one. It must just be super bowl wins because the Packers are in their 4th NFC championship game this decade but that isn't enough

There's always some luck involved in drafting a franchise player but as I've mentioned above Thompson deserves huge credit for selecting Rodgers. I just wanted to remind posters that according to Andrew Brandt he would have listened to trade offers with the Packers already on the clock if some team had called.

Picking a random timeline doesn't change the fact that Belichick and Brady have won four Super Bowls while Thompson with Favre and Rodgers have only one ring.

 

[bigbubbatd]

There's always some luck involved in drafting a franchise player but as I've mentioned above Thompson deserves huge credit for selecting Rodgers. I just wanted to remind posters that according to Andrew Brandt he would have listened to trade offers with the Packers already on the clock if some team had called.

Picking a random timeline doesn't change the fact that Belichick and Brady have won four Super Bowls while Thompson with Favre and Rodgers have only one ring.

The time line is not meant to be random but what have you done lately. Thompson is not as good as Belichick. Would never debate that but over the course of Rodgers tenure they are matched in super bowl wins while have the best qbs in the game.

Also every gm worth anything would listen to trade offers when they are the clock. Nothing to lose.

I know you don't think TT is a bad gm. And I am on record as saying we can move on from TT and I would be fine. However TT is viewed almost universally as a top 5 gm. I posted results from searching a while back. Yet many, not saying you, act like he is below average. He should use free agency more. He made a very good move with Cook over a guy like Green at TE but seems to have made a mistake judging the progression of our young cbs over Heyward.

 

[Half Empty]

Guess we are going to have to agree to disagree on the Rodgers pick. That was an incredibly ballsy pick by TT than many other guns wouldn't have done. And he nailed it and kept this franchise highly competitive for the next decade.

On the Patriots they are also one play away from having no super bowl wins in the last 11 years. The Packers are terrible Favre throw and an onside kick away from having 2 more appearances. Can't really play the game like that. Heck the Super bowls the Patriots won a few on last second plays or tuck rules.

Also I think the Patriots are the best run nfl organization cheating not withstanding. Not taking anything from their greatness. NY all measures they are one of the only teams better than the Packers over the past decade. Just saying everyone here is rating TT on Super wins. We should rate everyone else on that basis. Since Rodgers has become our qb has any team won more than 1? Nope

Sometimes have to chuckle. I don't think we need to agree to disagree on Rodgers.

As far as picking their QBs, TT certainly deserves credit for making the selection when he did, regardless.

was supposed to mean just what your first paragraph does.

On your third paragraph, again, there is little with which to disagree. My concern with the 'nobody else had done it better' viewpoint, valid though it may be, is that the Packers are my team, and they should have had at least one, maybe two more. Being equal to the other guys just isn't what I'm looking for.

The second one I'll leave alone for now. Partly too subjective, partly too much research involved. I seriously considered leaving out the Pats two losses, but I figured at least making it TO the SB was worthy of something, and once I was there, I couldn't help mentioning the Giants. In my personal opinion, there is a difference between making a great (but reasonable/understandable/eyecatching) play (the Pats interception) and a once-in-a-lifetime grab (the helmet catch). Because there's no way of rating/ranking that sort of thing, we'll probably just have to agree to disagree on that part.

 

[BrokenArrow]

While I generally agree with that statement the front office of a Super Bowl contender should react once it is abundantly clear their depth guys aren't up to the task.

How do you know he didn't? CBs don't grow on trees.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The time line is not meant to be random but what have you done lately. Thompson is not as good as Belichick. Would never debate that but over the course of Rodgers tenure they are matched in super bowl wins while have the best qbs in the game.

We have to agree to disagree on this topic as I like to judge general managers, head coaches and even players over their entire tenure with a team.

As I've mentioned repeatedly, although a lot of posters believe I want Thompson to be fired immediately, overall TT has been very successful over his tenure with the Packers. Unfortunately his reluctance to upgrade positions of need with free agents or via trade has most likely cost the Packers at least another title.

How do you know he didn't? CBs don't grow on trees.

The Packers didn't add a veteran cornerback during the season, that's how I know.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

We have to agree to disagree

Hey, get your own saying !

 

[PackAttack12]

Honestly? None of us have any idea how the team would look without Rodgers.

Maybe Favre isnt traded and leads another Super Bowl title, maybe the team was terrible the Packers draft Russell Wilson and he wins the Super Bowl.

Maybe TT builds decent roster but never finds a good QB therefore we make the playoffs but dont win ever like the Texans.

Maybe the Packers are awful and draft Von Miller and signing Manning and they lead a Super Bowl run.

With no Rodgers they'd also have a lot more money to spend.

None of us have any idea how the team would look right now without Rodgers.

Without Rodgers or another super star QB, the supporting cast is likely much better with more cap space and better picks.

It is nowhere near as simple as just taking him off the team and asking what is left.

Carl...like I said, take Rodgers off of this team. It's not even close to having enough good/elite talent to compete. Rodgers makes this whole operation go.

If we continue at the rate we're going, we better hope that we draft the next Favre/Rodgers, or this thing is goin to get ugly when Rodgers is gone.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Carl...like I said, take Rodgers off of this team. It's not even close to having enough good/elite talent to compete. Rodgers makes this whole operation go.

If we continue at the rate we're going, we better hope that we draft the next Favre/Rodgers, or this thing is goin to get ugly when Rodgers is gone.

The problem is that is so true of many teams. Just look at Denver. They lost an average Peyton manning and missed the playoffs. The raiders lost Carr and became awful. The Vikings lost an aging rb and some below average tackles and collapsed. Seattle lost some olineman and have been a good not great team. The cardinals had palmer play like the aging qb he is and they missed the playoffs. Take the best player especially a qb off most teams abd they will struggle a ton. Look at the steelers who have elite talent at wr and rb when big Ben doesn't play

 

[Carl]

Carl...like I said, take Rodgers off of this team. It's not even close to having enough good/elite talent to compete. Rodgers makes this whole operation go.

If we continue at the rate we're going, we better hope that we draft the next Favre/Rodgers, or this thing is goin to get ugly when Rodgers is gone.

Like I said, simply removing Rodgers doesn't make sense since the rest of the roster would be a whole lot different without him.

Also, it's common knowledge teams rarely contend without a very good QB.

Dallas is a great example the last three seasons when they were 4-12 with a bad QB and a contender the other two years.

The one exception over the years was the 11-5 Patriots who literally had one of the easiest scehdules of all time and were blown out by muliptle playoff teams.

Even though the Pats were 3-1 without Brady this year, they were beat bad at home vs the Bills and wouldnt win the Superbowl without Brady.

 

[Mondio]

Carl...like I said, take Rodgers off of this team. It's not even close to having enough good/elite talent to compete. Rodgers makes this whole operation go.

If we continue at the rate we're going, we better hope that we draft the next Favre/Rodgers, or this thing is goin to get ugly when Rodgers is gone.

I don't agree with you. on defense we have guys that will start all over this league. Giuon would be in heavy rotation on pretty much any team. Daniels would be a starter and a damn fine one anywhere in this league. I like the way Clark is looking, and he is so young. Our ILB's are probably average for this league. Matthews has been great, he's just ok lately. Perry would start for a lot of teams. Peppers is old, but still effective. Our CB's ahve been plagued with injury all year and look nothing like they did as rookies even. I'm giving them a pass till I see them healthy. Our safeties are pretty good starters, better than most. That's just defense.

Offense? practically our entire starting offensive line would replace many others, in their entirety. our pass catchers are pretty dang good. Both TE's would probably be 1 and 2 for many teams across this league. RB is not great, but with Rodgers they fit this offense well but probably not anything that would start for anyone else. Other than an inshape lacy but he's on IR.

Yes Rodgers is great, but quit acting like he's doing it alone.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Both TE's would probably be 1 and 2 for many teams across this league.

Mostly agree with your evaluation but there's no way Richard Rodgers is the #2 tight end for many teams in the league.

 

[Cheese Meister]

Yes, I would be sad, but I would be proud of all we accomplished this season.

I don't understand the chorus of "fire TT and Capers." If we were dead last like the Bears, then yes, some of the top people need to be culled. Not winning the Super Bowl every year is not a good reason to clean out the front office.

That said, GO PACK GO!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't understand the chorus of "fire TT and Capers." If we were dead last like the Bears, then yes, some of the top people need to be culled. Not winning the Super Bowl every year is not a good reason to clean out the front office.

Unfortunately it's been six years since the Packers have won the Super Bowl while having the best quarterback in the league though.

 

[RRyder]

Carl...like I said, take Rodgers off of this team. It's not even close to having enough good/elite talent to compete. Rodgers makes this whole operation go.

If we continue at the rate we're going, we better hope that we draft the next Favre/Rodgers, or this thing is goin to get ugly when Rodgers is gone.

Take Big Ben off the Steelers and they might win 5 games.

Take Ryan off the Falcons, a team that is being universally touted as better then us across the board outside of QB, and they "might" win 2 games.

Hell this is the first time in years that one injury to Gronk might not doom the mighty Pats in the POs

Regarding Rodgers taking off a teams Elite QB in an effort to judge how good GM really is is silly when the GM brought in said QB.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Interesting thread:

As I said in another thread, I think if we lose tomorrow and it's on the defense giving up a lead and lack of adjustments, I think Capers has to be held accountable for that. I felt our struggles against Dallas were not simply just lack of depth in the secondary, I felt he called some faulty schemes out there.

There will not be a "blow it all up" offseason regardless of tomorrow's outcome. Team made progress and got back to more of the Packers that we all know look. Unless Rodgers starts trying to do too much again or going into a mental lapse like he did early this season, I'm fairly confident we won't need huge changes outside of changing things up on defense.

But I do think you always gotta be open to making some changes with each year that comes just short of winning it all. Mike McCarthy decided to fire Slocum just 2 years ago and give up play calling, the latter of which may not have worked out in the end, but I can see why he felt he should try it. Our front office may want to consider making some similar changes as well because sometimes they can work out for the better.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Take Big Ben off the Steelers and they might win 5 games.

Take Ryan off the Falcons, a team that is being universally touted as better then us across the board outside of QB, and they "might" win 2 games.

Hell this is the first time in years that one injury to Gronk might not doom the mighty Pats in the POs

Regarding Rodgers taking off a teams Elite QB in an effort to judge how good GM really is is silly when the GM brought in said QB.

While I agree with your overall sentiment there's reason to believe the Packers would be perform worse than all the other teams you mentioned when taking Rodgers off the roster.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

As I said in another thread, I think if we lose tomorrow and it's on the defense giving up a lead and lack of adjustments, I think Capers has to be held accountable for that. I felt our struggles against Dallas were not simply just lack of depth in the secondary, I felt he called some faulty schemes out there.

I honestly believe the secondary is struggling mostly because of a lack of talent at the cornerback position.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

I honestly believe the secondary is struggling mostly because of a lack of talent at the cornerback position.

I'm talking about the defense as a whole, not just the secondary. If your secondary needs some help, do something like throw heavy blitzes at opposing QBs and don't just give them all day to throw. Don't just sit back with this soft zone nonsense and let them fire to TEs that get no attention in the middle of the field. Now, not having Burnett out there didn't help, but I still say he decided not to give any strange looks to Prescott that he had talked about.

 

[PackerDNA]

I'm talking about the defense as a whole, not just the secondary. If your secondary needs some help, do something like throw heavy blitzes at opposing QBs and don't just give them all day to throw. Don't just sit back with this soft zone nonsense and let them fire to TEs that get no attention in the middle of the field. Now, not having Burnett out there didn't help, but I still say he decided not to give any strange looks to Prescott that he had talked about.

The problem with this D when it blitzes is that most times they just run into blockers, get stuck, and leave the DB's hung out to dry.