Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TJV" data-source="post: 634765" data-attributes="member: 4300">Again, whether we like it or not (and many of us obviously don’t like it) not signing significant UFAs is Thompson’s modus operandi. He acted no differently during the most recent off season than he did during the 2013, 2012 (unless you count Saturday and Hargrove as “significant”), 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, and 2007. And if they had won the Super Bowl, which UFA wouldn’t have Thompson signed compared to the ones he didn’t in the last off season? Respectfully, did it psychologically effect their play during the first four, five, or six games of the season? Did it affect the play of their opponents’ during those games? Certainly after the debacle at Denver, the “weight of being the favorites” (which previously “resulted” in a 6-0 record) was lifted and then that lifting was reinforced with the loss at Carolina, wasn't it? It looks to me like you’re straining to explain what’s happened. I understand the desire to do so, but IMO the way the Packers started the season contradicts your theory. And while I agree the players are certainly to blame I also include the coaching staff.</blockquote>

Total: 127 (members: 6, guests: 121)