TT needs to go

[TJV]

sdh09e44 mentioned on another thread that Green has had concussion issues.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That may have had something to do with Thompson's decision not to pursue him. Not even inquiring about the cost of acquiring Trevathan remains a mystery to me.

Might explain SD keeping Gates over him as well. I think there is a lot of information that TT has on FA's (and his own players) that us fans don't have. So hearing about the Trevathan "non-call" to me was just an indication that TT had no interest in him. We as fans can think he is nuts for not showing any interest, but I'm guessing that it was a case of TT just flat out knowing more about Trevathan then we do.

 

[Carl]

Might explain SD keeping Gates over him as well. I think there is a lot of information that TT has on FA's (and his own players) that us fans don't have. So hearing about the Trevathan "non-call" to me was just an indication that TT had no interest in him. We as fans can think he is nuts for not showing any interest, but I'm guessing that it was a case of TT just flat out knowing more about Trevathan then we do.

Trevathon could have been a product of all the talent around him.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Might explain SD keeping Gates over him as well. I think there is a lot of information that TT has on FA's (and his own players) that us fans don't have. So hearing about the Trevathan "non-call" to me was just an indication that TT had no interest in him. We as fans can think he is nuts for not showing any interest, but I'm guessing that it was a case of TT just flat out knowing more about Trevathan then we do.

I don't trust his assessment of every single player, or else he wouldn't have so many first round flubs, lack of depth, or recurring holes in the team.

Let's be honest, the likelihood of him getting Trevathan was slim due to one factor: He didn't draft him. If he were on GB and had a comparable year last season, he wouldn't have let him go. Like Hawk and Perry. Even if he had proven to be an average player in our system like these two, he would have been offered a generous extension

 

[RRyder]

Yet Thompson hasn't been able to adequately address inside linebacker for four years running and tight end since Finley got injured. As I've said repeatedly he has done a marvelous job building the core of the team but a terrible one of using free agency to selectively address positions of need.

With the uncertainty of how a draft will work out nearly two months in advance sometimes teams have to take a calculated risk on a veteran player from another team with Trevathan and Green being prime examples of players that could have improved positions lacking in talent during this offseason.



Rodgers was ranked second in the league in passer rating after six weeks, so while he struggled against the Rams he mostly played on an elite level before the bye week.

After that he ranked 28th in passer rating the rest of the regular and not surprisingly the Packers went 4-6 (they actually would have gone 3-7 if not for the hail mary at Detroit).

IMO that serves as proof the Packers need elite play from their QB to be a Super Bowl contender.

Pointing to his stats doesn't mean he was elite weeks 4-6. The offense was actually really pretty bad against the 49ers and the Rams. Our DEFENSE won those games through and through. Fine you can have the Chargers game but then that means we just have very different versions of what "elite"means.

The fact that he didn't throw any interceptions and kept his QBR up doesn't mean he was elite. It means he didn't suck.

Seriously how many games would people say Rodgers won for us this year?

The week one matchup against the Bears? Sure.

Seattle? Nope. The entire team played pretty great that game

KC? You can make an argument here for sure but the D played great for the 1st 3 1/2 quartets in order to build up the lead.

49ers? Hell no

Rams? Hell no

Chargers? I'll give it to ya.

Wow 2 of our 6 wins before the bye week we're solely due to Rodgers playing Elite. You can make an argument for the Chiefs if you want due to the late surge they had but even then that's a whopping 3 games of elite QB play CARRYING THIS TEAM all season. He was average at best after week 3 and this defense did carry this team to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

If Rodgers had even just have been good, not even elite mind you, we would have been at worst in the Conference Championship game. Arguing that last year showed we need Rodgers to play at an elite level to be successful is foolish. Last year simply good QB play would've been good enough.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

4-6 with the 28th ranked passer and a running game that went to crap out of nowhere. 3 of the losses by 1 score in games the defense allowed 20 or less. How many games do they win with say the 12th ranked passer. I would say they generally need good QB play but wouldn't crank it up to elite. Even back in 2013 when Rodgers got hurt they went 2-2-1 with Flynn who is not even good at all.

The Packers have a winning percentage of .672 with Rodgers as their starter compared to .389 with him being out because of an injury since 2008. In addition the team is 13-24 (.351) when Rodgers has a passer rating under 90 during his career, so I think it´s fair to assume this team needs elite QB play to consistently win.

I'm not even concerned about TE. I think it's a lot of hot air. I think RR YPC will be up over 10, probably 11 YPC again this year and any TE that is giving you 50-60 catches and 8TD's is filling the TE position nicely in this league. Big body, great hands. He made some nice catches for us last year. I don't think these other guys were going to offer any more. SOmething different maybe, but not more. and i'm done wondering why SD let Green go, i've already come to the conclusion he wasn't worth it. Young ascending players aren't jettisoned in favor of old declining players in this league very often. Maybe they just misjudged, maybe they know something? Maybe Ted knew something? If we can agree he can evaluate talent, well, he should have a pretty good idea who and what these guys are right?

An athletic tight end would be able to stretch a defense, opening up short to intermediate routes for receivers as well as the running game. Rodgers is fine as a #2 TE and a red zone threat but the Packers desperately need an upgrade at the starter position.

Pointing to his stats doesn't mean he was elite weeks 4-6. The offense was actually really pretty bad against the 49ers and the Rams. Our DEFENSE won those games through and through. Fine you can have the Chargers game but then that means we just have very different versions of what "elite"means.

The fact that he didn't throw any interceptions and kept his QBR up doesn't mean he was elite. It means he didn't suck.

Seriously how many games would people say Rodgers won for us this year?

The week one matchup against the Bears? Sure.

Seattle? Nope. The entire team played pretty great that game

KC? You can make an argument here for sure but the D played great for the 1st 3 1/2 quartets in order to build up the lead.

49ers? Hell no

Rams? Hell no

Chargers? I'll give it to ya.

Wow 2 of our 6 wins before the bye week we're solely due to Rodgers playing Elite. You can make an argument for the Chiefs if you want due to the late surge they had but even then that's a whopping 3 games of elite QB play CARRYING THIS TEAM all season. He was average at best after week 3 and this defense did carry this team to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

If Rodgers had even just have been good, not even elite mind you, we would have been at worst in the Conference Championship game. Arguing that last year showed we need Rodgers to play at an elite level to be successful is foolish. Last year simply good QB play would've been good enough.

Rodgers was on pace for close to 4,000 yards, 40 TDs and only 5 INTs during the first six games. Of course he wasn´t perfect before the bye week but expecting any better numbers is ludicrous.

Once he started to struggle after the bye week the team lost seven out of 12 games, which over an entire season would not have been good enough to make the playoffs. So once again, the Packers don´t win constantly when their quarterback doesn´t play at an elite level.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Pointing to his stats doesn't mean he was elite weeks 4-6. The offense was actually really pretty bad against the 49ers and the Rams. Our DEFENSE won those games through and through. Fine you can have the Chargers game but then that means we just have very different versions of what "elite"means.

The fact that he didn't throw any interceptions and kept his QBR up doesn't mean he was elite. It means he didn't suck.

Seriously how many games would people say Rodgers won for us this year?

The week one matchup against the Bears? Sure.

Seattle? Nope. The entire team played pretty great that game

KC? You can make an argument here for sure but the D played great for the 1st 3 1/2 quartets in order to build up the lead.

49ers? Hell no

Rams? Hell no

Chargers? I'll give it to ya.

Wow 2 of our 6 wins before the bye week we're solely due to Rodgers playing Elite. You can make an argument for the Chiefs if you want due to the late surge they had but even then that's a whopping 3 games of elite QB play CARRYING THIS TEAM all season. He was average at best after week 3 and this defense did carry this team to the 2nd round of the playoffs.

If Rodgers had even just have been good, not even elite mind you, we would have been at worst in the Conference Championship game. Arguing that last year showed we need Rodgers to play at an elite level to be successful is foolish. Last year simply good QB play would've been good enough.

That's fair and all, but we are talking about quality wins, not against teams like the Rams, 49ers, Cowboys, Vikings, and Bears, who really don't have much going on in terms of offense.

The defense struggles mightily against good offenses, and they still got thumped by the top teams in the regular season. So yeah, the defense played very well against a weak schedule, and I'll take that, but they did nothing to prove to me that they can carry a team on their own or without elite QB play.

 

[RRyder]

That's fair and all, but we are talking about quality wins, not against teams like the Rams, 49ers, Cowboys, Vikings, and Bears, who really don't have much going on in terms of offense.

The defense struggles mightily against good offenses, and they still got thumped by the top teams in the regular season. So yeah, the defense played very well against a weak schedule, and I'll take that, but they did nothing to prove to me that they can carry a team on their own or without elite QB play.

My point is he was an elite QB after week 3. I get that we'd need him to play at an elite level to consistently beat the really good teams. This isn't a news flash though. Without a historic defense then your going to need top flight QB play to do that. Denver did it with a historic defense yes but look at say Pittsburgh. Not nearly the same team without Big Ben. How bout Cincy? That teams stacked top to bottom but the moment Dalton went down so did their chances.

Really still cant believe people are arguing Rodgers was playing like an elite guy weeks 4-6. Anyone that watched those games can tell you he wasn't. In fact there was worry going into the bye week about just how far our offense had fallen off the previous 3 weeks

 

[Deleted member 6794]

My point is he was an elite QB after week 3. I get that we'd need him to play at an elite level to consistently beat the really good teams. This isn't a news flash though. Without a historic defense then your going to need top flight QB play to do that. Denver did it with a historic defense yes but look at say Pittsburgh. Not nearly the same team without Big Ben. How bout Cincy? That teams stacked top to bottom but the moment Dalton went down so did their chances.

There are several teams that are capable of winning against other Super Bowl contenders with good, sometimes even mediocre QB play. The Packers need elite performances out of Rodgers to achieve that though.

 

[RRyder]

There are several teams that are capable of winning against other Super Bowl contenders with good, sometimes even mediocre QB play. The Packers need elite performances out of Rodgers to achieve that though.

There's Denver right now.

If we even simply had good QB play we'd have been playing Carolina in the NFCCG. Elite and the Arizona game is an afterthought . Simply good play and we advance

The list of teams last year that were title contenders that had mediocre or worse QB play was Denver. So you have one. Count em. One team.

Cincinnati-Minus good Dalton? Nope

Pittsburgh- Minus good Big Ben? Nope

NE? Take Brady off that team and see what their record is. Point to the Cassel year if you want but I can argue Cassel was better than Rodgers last year over the course of an entire season.

Carolina- Without MVP Cam? Nope

Arizona with out good Palmer? You saw what happened when he wasn't good.


Holy crap!!! It's almost like having good QB play is essential for a SB run unless you have a historic defense? I think you cracked the code

 

[Patriotplayer90]

There's Denver right now.

If we even simply had good QB play we'd have been playing Carolina in the NFCCG. Elite and the Arizona game is an afterthought . Simply good play and we advance

The list of teams last year that were title contenders that had mediocre or worse QB play was Denver. So you have one. Count em. One team.

Cincinnati-Minus good Dalton? Nope

Pittsburgh- Minus good Big Ben? Nope

NE? Take Brady off that team and see what their record is. Point to the Cassel year if you want but I can argue Cassel was better than Rodgers last year over the course of an entire season.

Carolina- Without MVP Cam? Nope

Arizona with out good Palmer? You saw what happened when he wasn't good.


Holy crap!!! It's almost like having good QB play is essential for a SB run unless you have a historic defense? I think you cracked the code

Even in the losses and when he struggled, Rodgers was elite in big moments. Adams and Jones dropped two more wins, and Rodgers won another with his hail Mary. He was elite on the last drive in Arizona, and got the team in position to tie the NFC Championship the year before.

Cassell was on a better team with a better coach, he wasn't called upon to be big in big moments. So I believe claiming that Rodgers was mediocre for the entirety of the final 10 games is inaccurate, and many of the 27 guys ranked ahead of him have hollow stats in comparison as you'll see they were mediocre when it mattered most.

 

[RRyder]

Even in the losses and when he struggled, Rodgers was elite in big moments. Adams and Jones dropped two more wins, and Rodgers won another with his hail Mary. He was elite on the last drive in Arizona, and got the team in position to tie the NFC Championship the year before.

Cassell was on a better team with a better coach, he wasn't called upon to be big in big moments. So I believe claiming that Rodgers was mediocre for the entirety of the final 10 games is inaccurate, and many of the 27 guys ranked ahead of him have hollow stats in comparison as you'll see they were mediocre when it mattered most.

I'll give you he was elite in big moments. That doesn't make for Elite QB play though necessarily. If that's the argument than damn Tebow really is getting screwed

 

[Deleted member 6794]

There's Denver right now.

If we even simply had good QB play we'd have been playing Carolina in the NFCCG. Elite and the Arizona game is an afterthought . Simply good play and we advance

The list of teams last year that were title contenders that had mediocre or worse QB play was Denver. So you have one. Count em. One team.

Cincinnati-Minus good Dalton? Nope

Pittsburgh- Minus good Big Ben? Nope

NE? Take Brady off that team and see what their record is. Point to the Cassel year if you want but I can argue Cassel was better than Rodgers last year over the course of an entire season.

Carolina- Without MVP Cam? Nope

Arizona with out good Palmer? You saw what happened when he wasn't good.


Holy crap!!! It's almost like having good QB play is essential for a SB run unless you have a historic defense? I think you cracked the code

You just don´t get it. I agree that most teams need good QB play to win against other Super Bowl contending teams, the Packers need Rodgers to be elite though to achieve that. It´s really not that hard to understand.

 

[RRyder]

You just don´t get it. I agree that most teams need good QB play to win against other Super Bowl contending teams, the Packers need Rodgers to be elite though to achieve that. It´s really not that hard to understand.

And my point is last year they wouldn't have needed him to be elite to achieve that. Simply good would have been enough. It's really isn't that hard to understand.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And my point is last year they wouldn't have needed him to be elite to achieve that. Simply good would have been enough.

Good enough for what??? Winning the Super Bowl??? I don´t think so. And BTW that´s your opinion but you don´t have any facts to support that claim.

 

[RRyder]

Good enough for what??? Winning the Super Bowl??? I don´t think so. And BTW that´s your opinion but you don´t have any facts to support that claim.

Well I do have the fact we were in OT in the Divisional round with mediocre QB play. It really isn't that far of a stretch to say if Rodgers played only just good the entire game we would have advanced to the NFCCG which is what I was referencing when I said "contend".

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Well I do have the fact we were in OT in the Divisional round with mediocre QB play. It really isn't that far of a stretch to say if Rodgers played only just good the entire game we would have advanced to the NFCCG which is what I was referencing when I said "contend".

That last drive vs. the Cardinals was pretty amazing. Considering he was throwing to Abbrederis, Janis and Rodgers most of the game he didn´t play terrible in that one.

 

[RRyder]

That last drive vs. the Cardinals was pretty amazing. Considering he was throwing to Abbrederis, Janis and Rodgers most of the game he didn´t play terrible in that one.

Not terrible. Just not what I would call good. He was very mediocre up untill that last drive where I'll admit he played great.

But one drive shouldn't define how you look at how a player played the entire game.

If he had played just slightly better than mediocre and had a good game it really isn't a stretch to say that final amazing drive wouldn't have been needed and they would have been playing Carolina the next week.

As I've said in an earlier post you can make the argument the Packers NEEDED Rodgers to play at an elite level to make it far in years past pretty easily. Just that last season is not a good reference point for that as simply good play consistently would have more than likely been enough to make it to the conference championship game.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

As I've said in an earlier post you can make the argument the Packers NEEDED Rodgers to play at an elite level to make it far in years past pretty easily. Just that last season is not a good reference point for that as simply good play consistently would have more than likely been enough to make it to the conference championship game.

Aside of the divisional playoff game the Packers played three teams making it to the conference championship during the 2015 season and were blown out in every single one of them (I don´t care about them nearly coming back after the Panther stopped competing). I don´t think being close vs. the Cardinals in the playoffs serves as prove the Packers were any less depandent on Rodgers performing at an elite level during the 2015 season.

 

[AmishMafia]

Not terrible. Just not what I would call good. He was very mediocre up untill that last drive where I'll admit he played great.

But one drive shouldn't define how you look at how a player played the entire game.

If he had played just slightly better than mediocre and had a good game it really isn't a stretch to say that final amazing drive wouldn't have been needed and they would have been playing Carolina the next week.

As I've said in an earlier post you can make the argument the Packers NEEDED Rodgers to play at an elite level to make it far in years past pretty easily. Just that last season is not a good reference point for that as simply good play consistently would have more than likely been enough to make it to the conference championship game.

You nailed it. AR connecting on a few more passes he normally makes per game and the Packer season looks a lot different.

I have seen the argument that if AR doesnt connect on the hail mary in Detroit we miss the playoffs. Opposite is true. Connectong on a few more passes per game and we have a few more wins and who knows. Home field and bye in playoffs and things go differently. Not sure how we do against Denver in SB, that defense was amazing. Think we would have done better than carolina.

 

[RRyder]

Aside of the divisional playoff game the Packers played three teams making it to the conference championship during the 2015 season and were blown out in every single one of them (I don´t care about them nearly coming back after the Panther stopped competing). I don´t think being close vs. the Cardinals in the playoffs serves as prove the Packers were any less depandent on Rodgers performing at an elite level during the 2015 season.

True but Rodgers also played pretty horribly in those 3 games. I agree the Carolina comeback I'm not counting either.

In any case I'll maintain we didn't have anywhere near elite QB after the first 3 weeks and still managed to make the playoffs and overtime in the Divisional round and to me that should show there is good amount of talent on this team compared to other top teams.

You disagree by saying the 1st six weeks were elite and not just through week 3. Fine. We simply disagree with what we saw.

 

[Sanguine camper]

The lack of interest in Neal and Raji is eye opening. Those were two high draft picks that the rest of the league deems mediocre to poor. I hope the Packers move on from both players. Signing our own medicare players just maintains the status quo. Perhaps TT has overvalued some of his own people over the years. Looks like it might have been better to have let both guys go a couple of years ago. The rest of the league isn't exactly entralled with their production.

 

[ExpatPacker]

Unfortunately the chances for TT to sign a FA that would be an upgrade to our existing roster is dwindling rapidly.

Jared Cook, Russell Okung, and a bunch of has-beens or 2-3rd tier players.

Sorry Ted, but unless you have something impressive cooked up, Myles Jack, Darron Lee and Reggie Ragland will be gone by the time #27 rolls around. I wouldn't count on Andrew Billings being there either, the top rated NT in the draft. Unless you're willing to give up some of those precious draft picks you hoard.

Ted's mantra about planning for the future, which is uttered only rarely since the only thing that usually escapes from Ted's mouth are empty words, won't do much to help the Packers next season.

 

[RepStar15]

I have always been a fan of his draft and develop mentality, but now I am done with it. If we do not win a Super Bowl this year, he is to blame. There were so many FA's and strong candidates on the trading block. We officially got nothing. We let Jared Cook walk, we didn't even contact Danny Trevethan, but we re-sign one of the worst LB on the team for a 5 million contract? Are you kidding me? So that Ted doesn't look like he wasted a second round pick. I would have been ok keeping Nick Perry at 1.5 million, that's about all he is worth. Nick Perry, a guy that doesn't even start, gets a 5 million dollar contract. Think about that.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You nailed it. AR connecting on a few more passes he normally makes per game and the Packer season looks a lot different.

I have seen the argument that if AR doesnt connect on the hail mary in Detroit we miss the playoffs. Opposite is true. Connectong on a few more passes per game and we have a few more wins and who knows. Home field and bye in playoffs and things go differently. Not sure how we do against Denver in SB, that defense was amazing. Think we would have done better than carolina.

Rodgers connecting on a few more passes wouldn´t have resulted in the Packers winning against Denver, Carolina or Arizona in the regular season. While #12 for sure didn´t play up to his potential I don´t think it´s fair to solely blame him for his below average performance as the receivers had trouble getting open, the running game wasn´t working and pass protection was terrible at times.

Also I´m not sure why you´re confident we could have done any better than the Panthers vs. the Broncos in the Super Bowl after the way Denver outplayed us in the regular season.

The lack of interest in Neal and Raji is eye opening. Those were two high draft picks that the rest of the league deems mediocre to poor. I hope the Packers move on from both players. Signing our own medicare players just maintains the status quo. Perhaps TT has overvalued some of his own people over the years. Looks like it might have been better to have let both guys go a couple of years ago. The rest of the league isn't exactly entralled with their production.

Raji decided to take a hiatus from the NFL for at least the 2016 season, there´s an entire thread about it:

https://www.packerforum.com/threads/raji-to-retire-from-nfl.65901/page-2#post-657233

Jared Cook, Russell Okung, and a bunch of has-beens or 2-3rd tier players.

There´s no reason for the Packers to be interested in Okung.