Ted Thompson: Man of Mystery

Look into his eyes, stare into his soul.  Green Bay Packers general manager Ted Thompson has shrouded himself in mystery since the day he arrived in Green Bay back in 2005.  Try, as you may, to determine what Thompson's next move will be and you'll find yourself more dumbfounded than before.  One thing is for certain: I'll never enter a poker game with Ted.

Thompson is the hottest topic of discussion among Packers fans and circles every offseason.  11 seasons later and we're still willing to speculate, pontificate and rationalize what he should do next to improve the Packers and most every year, none of those ideas come to fruition.  As is typical, fans get restless and extremely frustrated with Thompson's lack of activity in unrestricted free agency and with players outside of the Packers system.  Claims that the Packers are "one player away" and "wasting the best years of Aaron Rodgers' career" are heard all across Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, you name it.  Yet, the Packers have had a winning record nine of those years.  They've appeared in seven-straight postseasons and won a championship in that time as well.  

Many fans, some of you reading this right now, will respond by saying "Super Bowl or bust" and maintain your position that if the Packers don't win it all, the season is an automatic failure.  After the fact, shade is thrown at Thompson for not signing this guy or that guy or "I told you so" when a guy that they brought in and didn't sign (Owen Daniels) catches two touchdown passes in the conference championship game enroute to a Super Bowl appearance.  There are still some griping about the Packers not completing a trade to bring running back Marshawn Lynch to Green Bay in 2010, the year they won a Super Bowl, without Lynch.  

Never mind some of the other players who Packers fans clamored for who haven't turned out to be so great for their new teams:  Vernon Davis and Jairus Byrd come to mind.  I'm sure there are others.  But the point is that I don't want to let facts get in the way of their bemoaning how Thompson operates and how it's hurting the Packers more and more every year that he doesn't make a big move.  Aside from the winning seasons and consecutive playoff appearances mentioned above, I'd also ask those fans when the last time was that Green Bay had to cut a player they really wanted to keep because they couldn't afford to keep him.  Go ahead, I'll wait, and to be fair, throw out 2005 when Thompson had to begin to deal with the mess left behind by former Packers head coach, general manager and vice president Mike Sherman.

The Packers have quite a few free agents right now that are likely to depart and while most of them are positions of depth, they still need to be replaced.  Now, some fans simply see that Green Bay is about to lose a bunch of players in free agency and only see a hole on the roster that needs to be filled.  So why not fill it with the most experienced guy at the position and "go all in" to try and "win now", Ted?!  Take a chance, Ted, try something new!  Others have put together some very good arguments as to why some players would be good targets for the Pack.  They use stats and mindful logic when speaking to the financial ramifications of signing player X.  Many have tried to crack the code of what Thompson is thinking and what he does.  We have over a decade of history to go on and we still have just as much of a clue as we did when Thompson arrived at 1265 Lombardi Avenue over 10 years ago.

In his "Surviving Sunday" piece this past weekend, Adam Czech reminded us all about how many mock drafts and countless experts opined about the best middle linebacker for the Packers to draft early in 2015.  Finally, they would have to address this position of weakness after the departures of A.J. Hawk and Brad Jones and finally, they'd have a likely impact player who could man the middle of the field.  When time came for the Packers to make their picks, Thompson brought in two cornerbacks in rounds one and two.  Both were needed after the departures of Tramon Williams and Davon House, but middle linebacker was such a scapegoat and the linchpin of the issues on defense for Green Bay.  Thompson was criticized for "Ted being Ted" and ignoring an obvious need by not having signed any free agent linebackers nor drafting one early enough to be counted on as an impact player.

That's just one example of the mystery that surrounds Thompson.  In 2014, Thompson signed Julius Peppers and Letroy Guion in free agency and drafted Ha Ha Clinton-Dix in round one.  He filled several needs via free agency and early in the draft and many thought Thompson was finally turning a corner and starting to do some of the things he hadn't done for many years.  But there's always regression to the mean.  Ted is going to Ted, after all.  And he should.

I've said many times that we have yet to see a team win a championship who doesn't first get into the playoffs.  Those who have been fortunate enough have seen two Packers championship teams in the last 20 years who did it two very different ways.  The 1996 team dominated all season long and emphatically won Super Bowl XXXI while the 2010 team snuck in the back door and shocked everyone by claiming Super Bowl XLV.  Go ahead and complain that sure, the Packers get to the postseason every year but it's one-and-done or they are ousted in spectacular fashion, wasting another year in the window of opportunity while the team has high-caliber talent.  Remind us all that the Packers aren't the New England Patriots, who are in the Super Bowl every year (at least it seems that way).  That argument does have a point.  The Patriots have been to two Super Bowls since Green Bay last won theirs, losing the first and winning one just a year ago.  In terms of winning and playoff appearances, however, the Packers are right behind New England.  No, they're not the Patriots, a team that will probably be remembered and profiled as one of the most successful franchises in sports history (not just football) many years from now.  It's not easy to achieve the type of success that the Patriots have but let's not lose sight of the fact that the same can be said for the Packers.  There just aren't as many shiny trophies in the case, trophies that are incredibly difficult to attain.

That doesn't happen without good work from Thompson and his staff and credit has to be given where it's due.  So far this offseason, we have learned about several attractive free agent names who the Packers may be able to get after and bring in to fill some of those previously mentioned holes.  While some seem like really good options, such as tight end Jared Cook or linebacker James Laurinaitus, neither of which would count against the formula to determine compensatory draft picks for free agents gained and lost, we can't forget Ted's philosophy.  If a guy is going to come in and take time away from a younger player who can potentially give the Packers a decade of solid play, he's not likely to end up on Thompson's Packers.  Or maybe he will.  Your guess is as good as mine.  Maybe this is the year Ted makes a bigger move in bringing in an outside veteran to help the push to another NFC championship or maybe it's not.  Either side has just as good of a chance of being right.  And either way, the Packers are likely headed towards another season of 10 wins or more.  Still and after this past year, many eyes are on Thompson to fortify the Packers roster and avoid another disappointment like we saw during the middle of the season.  Thompson isn't immune to criticism and if the Packers have another quiet offseason and experience struggles again, he is going to face his fair share of criticism for it.

Beyond a few of their own free agents the Packers still may want to bring back this year (Mason Crosby, for one), there are quite a few important contracts up a year from now (Josh Sitton, T.J. Lang, David Bakhtiari, to name a few) and Thompson likely already knows who he wants back and how much it's going to cost him to do so.  He won't jeopardize those needs and so his increased or lack of activity this offseason may offer a clue as to what those priorities are.  Maybe.  Clues and Thompson are hardly synonymous.

So, after all of the rambling about Thompson and his ways, I've arrived at absolutely nothing.  No answer, no clarity, no major discovery.  And it's all part the mystery that is Ted Thompson.  

 

 

-------------------

Jason is a freelance writer on staff since 2012 and also co-hosts Cheesehead TV Live, Pulse of the Pack and Pack A Day podcasts.  You can follow him on Twitter here

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (119)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Bearmeat's picture

February 22, 2016 at 06:50 am

Nice article Jason. Starting in early March, we all get frustrated with TT so this is a timely piece.

A couple points:

1. TT won't sign a free agent that will cost him a compensatory pick, nor will he explore trades with other teams. Just not going to happen. Yes, it does turn him from a potentially great GM to merely a very good one. But you can't teach an old dog new tricks. So stop making yourselves miserable and get over it.

2. Yes, "only" 2 Lombardis since 1996 with 2 HOF QBs is not as good as it should be. But there are plenty of other teams who haven't even won 1 who have had great QBs. Plus, (as stated below), ARod has plenty of time left. So A little perspective here please.

3. The window is most emphatically NOT closing on TT/MM/ARs Green Bay Packers. GB was the 3rd youngest team in the NFL last year and the 5th youngest starting group. The only key player in the twilight of his career is Julius Peppers. Further, the Broncos just won a SB with a 40 year old QB. The Vikes almost did in 2009. The Pats did with a 37 year old QB in 2014. ARod has at least 5-7 years of elite play left in him. So in the vein of common human reason, let's all agree to let go of the "blow it up" garbage.

4. All that said, a released player (Martellus Bennett at TE, Paul Solai at NT) who would not cost a compensatory pick is another matter. TT might just do this. Man, I hope so - because the none of the TEs in the draft will be able to help a position desperately in need of it in 2016.

5. But probably not. Just hunker down until May folks. If you are a Packer fan under the current regime, February-April SUCKS. They aren't going to make any new moves. They aren't going to show up sportscenter. NO. Instead they'll make sure (by and large) that the fundamentals of their draft and develop team are sound and they'll address where it's not. It's called continuity and a winning program. You can't win it all if you don't get into the dance - and GB has gotten in more than anyone not named New England.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 07:38 am

'4. All that said, a released player (Martellus Bennett at TE, Paul Solai at NT) who would not cost a compensatory pick is another matter. TT might just do this. Man, I hope so - because the none of the TEs in the draft will be able to help a position desperately in need of it in 2016.'

I would love to see him look at some of these players that are getting released. Some of these players shouldn't cost a lot of money and could clearly help our team out.
I'm not looking for him to go out and get a biggest flashiest player like the Dolphins or Saints do. But I would love to see him go out and get a Martellus Bennett or Jordan Cameron or James Laurinaitis. Guys that won't command top dollar. But could come in and give the team a boost.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

February 22, 2016 at 08:00 am

Yep. Me too. If TT weren't so darn stubborn he'd be a top 10 GM of all time. He really has drafted that well. But he's human too. So he has missed enough that there are holes on the team that drafting alone won't fix in a timely manner.

:(

0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

February 22, 2016 at 08:28 am

>it does turn him from a potentially great GM to merely a very good one.

That depends on what you think a GM's role is. If it's to win Lombardi trophies then TT is just as successful as the 7 other GMs who have each won one in the last 8 years. If it's being a general manager, it'd be hard to find a GM who's been better at setting a team up for consistent long term success.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

February 22, 2016 at 08:37 am

Right. And I think that GMs are by and large judged by their record of Lombardis. Especially if they've dealt with a HOF QB. And TT has dealt with 2. He needs to get another Lombardi win to be considered an elite GM.

That said, undoubtably he has set GB up for long term success - if by success you mean "pretty good." He's just about the best in the biz at that.

0 points
0
0
RVAborn's picture

February 22, 2016 at 06:07 pm

I agree with every point you made minus #3. Being the youngest team each year and only upgrading with rookies doesn't make Rodgers get any younger. He gets the Pack to the playoffs, but the better teams exploit that inexperience of our roster year after year. I really hope he has 5-7 years left of ELITE play left (7 years he would be almost 40), but seeing how Peyton Manning is a shell of his former self, I wouldn't count on it. Manning would only have one ring to his name if it wasn't for Elway.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 06:51 am

Thompson isn't that hard to figure out.

He builds his team through the draft. He likes to keep his team young and tries to lock up the players that out perform their rookie contracts to long term deals. The players that haven't performed up to their standards are allowed to go out and test free agency to set their value.
He doesn't like to go into free agency and sign a bunch of free agents because not only are teams over paying for the players they also lose compensation picks. Also by spending big dollars on other teams free agents, it takes away the ability to resign more of their own players. Signing big time free agents usually doesn't work out for teams and a few years after spending a lot of money on those players usually the teams are having to redo contracts a few years later to get under the cap. (See New Orleans).
The free agents he typically does bring in are players that were released by their former team, which doesn't take away from the compensation picks he gets.

In the draft Ted typically likes to draft at least 1 OL in the draft. Usually in the middle rounds. Also he likes to take at least 1 DL in each draft.

For the most part I agree with Ted's philosophy. The best way to build a team is through the draft. I also agree with not going out and spending a ton of money in free agency.
But I would like to see him take a few more chances in free agency, and bring in players that could help improve the team. Players like Guion. It would be nice if he brought in some players so he wouldn't have to rely solely on the draft. There are players that they could bring in to provide a boost to the roster. I hope this year he goes out and finds a couple of those players.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 22, 2016 at 07:38 am

I pretty much agree with this line by line.

I'm not upset at "Thompson's lack of activity in unrestricted free agency and with players outside of the Packers system." I'm upset he leaves holes in the roster for years at time. I totally agree with his desire to file those spots with draft picks, but the draft is a crap shoot to some extent and when he whiffs on picks or when he doesn't have enough of high picks to get they players they need Thompson needs to so something other than shaft the coaches with guys who clearly can not play (like MD Jennings and Nate Palmer). Whoever he brings in to fill gaps does not need to be a 20 million guaranteed guy, just someone who is not a total liability.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 07:53 am

Exactly. They need to eliminate the MD Jennings and Nate Palmers from the team.

Also, with the draft and develop you need to allow some of the players the time to develop.
If they go out and get another TE for example it would allow more time for guys like Kennard Backman or Mitchell Henry time to develop and not be forced to play before they are ready.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 22, 2016 at 09:18 am

It would also give the TE's someone to learn from. This is important. Just ask Aaron Rodgers about what he learned by watching Brett Favre.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

February 23, 2016 at 12:09 pm

Lol, every time I heard Aaron Rodgers talk about what he learned from watching Brett Favre, it seemed to me like a backhanded compliment or thinly veiled slight about all the things Brett Favre did wrong.

The ONLY thing I believe Rodgers truly learned from watching Brett Favre (as opposed to learning what NOT to do), was learning from how Brett interacted with, and related to, his team mates- something Rodgers still doesn't seem all too comfortable with.

Just my take, of course.

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

February 22, 2016 at 03:57 pm

Perfectly stated RC. Not much more to add.

0 points
0
0
slit's picture

February 22, 2016 at 07:10 am

2 SB trophies, with Brett Favre + Aaron Rodgers, is not good enough. Go get Danny Trevathan & Matt Forte and give yourself the best natural ILB and pass catching RB this team has had in a long time. Neither guy would break the bank (prob 6 & 4 mil respectively) and the Pack would immediately be significantly better. Pretty laughable to bring up Cook & Lauranitis; they were both hot garbage last year; well, Cook has been garbage his whole career.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 22, 2016 at 07:25 am

You laugh at Cook and Laurinaitis, but those are the FAs in the pool TT is usually wading in. Not Trevathan and not Forte. It's a double whammy: you lose cap space AND compensatory positioning when you go after the big-name guys. I think the key term (and others have used it here) is "long-term health". Maybe we've entered an era where such frugal cap management isn't such a big deal, but the cautious approach is a smart one.

In all, the bottom of the roster in GB turns over regularly. He's looking for players, but not the high-profile players we know. He's rolling the dice on UDFAs and draft picks. Sometimes you get a Joe Thomas...sometimes you get a Sam Shields.

0 points
0
0
slit's picture

February 22, 2016 at 09:10 am

Forte will command about half of what Peppers has been paid, since he came over from Chicago. In regards to UDFAs, most of the time you get a Joe Thomas, rarely you find a Sam Shields or Tramon Williams.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 22, 2016 at 11:35 am

"Forte will command about half of what Peppers has been paid"

True, but it's apples and oranges: pass rushers are at a premium while RBs are not. The question is: does a running back like Forte merit that cap space relative to other team needs and compensatory pick positioning? What CAN'T you do if you pay Forte (or an RB in general) and forfeit compensatory picks?

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

February 22, 2016 at 12:12 pm

But were talking Ted and in his mind he can find a fifth rounder to come in off the bench for Lacy. It will be lacy left lacy right until he needs a rest so you don't need a Forte. No point in paying the bucks when you don't have to. Ted is all about the bucks

0 points
0
0
slit's picture

February 22, 2016 at 12:16 pm

The position value is reflected in the $ spent on each, so your apples to oranges argument doesn't hold water here. TT wants value, regardless of position. Forte is an elite player, on the back end of his career; sound familiar? The west coast offense is predicated on using RBs in the passing game, something Forte is exceptional at. I'd say that's 4-5 mil/yr (for prob only 2yrs) well spent, considering the 20mil in cap space. I'd much rather have Forte at that price, then say guys like Mike Neal or Nick Perry, who are average talent that can be replaced, or upgraded, with the right draft picks. And enough with the compensatory picks - the Packers would receive more value, in signing Forte, and getting back picks by letting a guy like Raji, Perry, Neal, or Hayward go.

0 points
0
0
RVAborn's picture

February 23, 2016 at 12:34 am

TT just seems to over value his own guys/future draft picks, while giving minimal credence to outside talent. Its frustrating as a fan, but that's who he is.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 23, 2016 at 07:28 am

I think the FA market in general is about the "overvalue" issue. Would you rather overvalue a player you know intimately or a player you know from a distance?

0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

February 22, 2016 at 07:32 am

Good post.

Win NOW at all costs is anti-Ted.

Based on what TT has actually said in interviews, his perspective is the long term success of the org. Based on watching him work, he's been true to what he's said. He's also said you do what you think is right and hope for the best in a league where everyone plays injured or suddenly can't play anymore. He's a gambler, but a gambler who isn't willing to chance busting out the Packers long term on a big pot when they're in the tournament every season his way.

That's why we don't end up with 32 FAs on the roster like the 2014 Bears, or sign a ton of FAs like the Colts 2015 "Win NOW" team, or the 2011 Dream Team, all disasters. The grass is not always greener just because a FA comes from a different team.

Signing a high buck FA or three may or may not be the short term Win NOW answer. It also means that players who TT picked and the team has been developing, like Daniels, will hit FA. Because the cap space went to someone else.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 22, 2016 at 01:20 pm

"That's why we don't end up with 32 FAs on the roster"

Nobody is asking for that level of activity in Free Agency.

0 points
0
0
RVAborn's picture

February 23, 2016 at 12:55 am

Exactly! Fans don't want a cap-crippling spending spree; rather, add the right guy or two that can immediately plug positions of need versus taking 3 or 4 years via the draft.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 23, 2016 at 07:31 am

Imagine the pressure it would take off the draft if they did go get a DT or ILB or TE prior to the draft...and it doesn't have to be a top tier guy. Construct the contract the right way, and those guys don't even have to make it through camp if a developing player emerges who can man the position just as ably.

I realize this has been said a million times, but it always bears repeating.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

February 24, 2016 at 02:05 am

You mean like Letroy Guion?

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 24, 2016 at 05:29 am

Very much like Letroy Guion, and in addition to Letroy Guion.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

February 24, 2016 at 10:18 am

In an earlier post, I called Guion a "keep your options open" kind of signing. I doubt that TT loves Guion, but as you say, having Guion frees Thompson up to go with the BPA when he is on the clock. It also gives the Packers a bit of leverage if they want to negotiate with Raji.

I agree that these low-profile signings are actually quite important, and it's one of the things that I think TT does pretty well. When was the last time that any player was really able to "hold the Packers hostage?" Heck, even Favre lost that hand.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

February 22, 2016 at 09:07 am

The corollary of your defense of TT, Jason, is that GB can afford to retain its free agents because there is usually only 1, sometimes 2 or 3, that are red chippers. I'd much rather have the problem of having a plethora of really good players such that the GM can't sign them all than a dearth.

This year is a pathetic example. There was Daniels, perhaps Crosby (though Jersey Al might not think so) and then a bunch of meh type guys. We can't even reach a consensus on whether we want Perry or Neal, Guion or Raji - this is the which guy might be closest to average decisions. Most of our FAs fall into the I don't care, get rid of him, or if he's dirt cheap categories: Barclay, Goode, JJ, Kuhn, Q, Richardson, Mulumba, Taylor, Banjo, Perillo, Tolzien and Starks. Only Hayward (ironically, a guy no one thinks we should or are going to keep), Raji, Guion, Neal, Perry, Crosby and Starks are guys that would significantly contribute to the 2016 GB Packers.

I actually have been on board with TT so far. I don't think we've reached the "we have to win now" window, but perhaps the 2017 year, when AR turns 34, might be the time to start looking hard at FAs. More likely we will be rebuilding our OL, perhaps our OLBs, TEs, etc.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 09:49 am

Reynoldo, very often I found your comments very insightful, but when we come to the TT issue, you become blinded by the hate. No, you are not right regarding TT. TT is one of the 5th best GM around NFL. That is consensus opinion of the experts we can read, hear and see when it comes to the ability to run the team. Also, I doubt that you and TT haters understands well cap rules and projections. I admit I know sh*t about cap, but reading around, when we comes to TT, all of the authors are positively surprised how TT manage to keep Packers as contenders while maintain healthy cap. Something that you and others does not pay attention of. Also, if things would go your way and lot of FA signed in manner "win now" fails, TT would be guilty because he was listening
Adam and not listening Brad or listening Brad and not listening Adam who to sigh in FA.
I respect attitude of e. g. Bearmeat, when he respects what TT achieved, but pointing out that he would like TT to sign some FA. That kind of "complaints" I understand. He respects profession and professionals, but knows something and would like to give his contribution to the team...
For all those who claims that TT does not know his job, and that you'll do it much better, please, apply for GM job, or for scouting job as the first step. After you show success, I'll be the first to vote for you...

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

February 22, 2016 at 11:27 am

Croat - I don't think Reynoldo is one of the TT haters. Like myself, he questions some of TT's moves or non-moves. I don't mean to speak for Reynoldo as he is more than capable of defending his comments. In any case, questioning or being critical of TT or MM or anyone else for that matter does not make us haters. The team that TT put together for the 2015 season went 5-7 after the bye week including the 2 playoff games. That is not a contending record, yet TT did nothing to improve the WR corps or TE when it was painfully obvious that our passing game needed better options for our QB. And we all know that ILB has not been addressed effectively for the last 3-4 seasons. I appreciate the job that TT has done as much as anyone but there have been times when I'm confident that he could have done just a little better to get this team over the hump and to the SB over the last few seasons. See my post below for my detailed comments on the difference an FA signing or 2 may have made for this team. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 11:28 am

'61 - great minds think alike!

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 03:56 pm

As I said I really like some of the Reynoldo's comments here. And I agree with you he is not in the haters group. It is not the question of being critical of TT/MM/whoever, but to insist that any of them need to do this or that is not been critical. We all know that TT is not against FA signing, but he wants to be sure what he is getting for Packers money (Charles Woodson, Julius Peppers, Letroy Guion, Ryan Pickett, Charlie Peprah, John Kuhn etc.). He will not sign guys like Jimmy Graham, Jairus Byrd, Ndamukong Suh etc., because they are always overpaid for their services. This FA season lot of Packers fans want to sign Laurinaitis, Long and Cook, cut by Rams. With those 3 players Packers will win SB. That is sure...
That is what was the idea of my post. I just want to say that TT, MM or whoever professional from Packers is do not need to be advised in the ultimate manner...
And, I'm sure that Reynoldo knows that I respects his football knowledge. That is why I might be to harsh in my comment...

0 points
0
0
RVAborn's picture

February 23, 2016 at 01:40 am

Croat- you are correct that he doesn't sign those big name free agents, and I commend him for not obliterating our cap. It's the middle tier guys that could immediately contribute that he seems to ignore year after year.

For all the criticism Jared Cook receives here, I bet he would make that one yard route to the flat look a lot less futile than Richard Rodgers. That 4.5 40 would be nice streaking down the seam as well. He wouldn't break the bank either, far from it.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 22, 2016 at 01:24 pm

"please, apply for GM job, or for scouting job as the first step."

Maybe you should go take your own advice.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 03:25 pm

Thanks for advice, but I'm not trying to correct (teach?) person who is working as GM of Packers. I try to understand his moves and his decision. I admit, very often I do not see what is going on. Like last year draft. I was stunned with TT's first 2 choices. But I made my research and suddenly I was all for his choice. Nobody saw what is coming... We all are discussing ILB, some other CBs or TE. Also I remember here very much rage after TT selected Ty Montgomery as 3rd draft choice "why he pick WR, we have enough WRs!"... Again, I made my research and read what Packers scout said, that Ty is bigger Randall Cobb. I understood. Every year we have similar discussion here. Basically 75% of people here constantly saying that TT has to go... Every year is "must be year we must win SB". And if TT does not apply to that wishes, he is not good, well, not "not good", but hew stinks...
Sorry. Again I'm not trying to teach professional how he need to do his job!

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 22, 2016 at 05:52 pm

So do you agree with the moves of every President of the United States? They are paid for their work. Are you always happy with what you are served at a restaurant? The cooks are professionals too. Do you know what they all have in common with Ted? They are not above question, neither am I or you...

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 12:29 pm

Is he professional or he is politician of some profession? There is some professional politicians, but most of them are not at top position. Second, he is elected by people, GM of any team are hired!
Regarding cook or some other professional(s) what do you do when you do not like cook work (meal that you are eating!). Do you start to teach him how to do his job? Or do you just express your unpleasure and avoid to come to that restaurant again? Is that the solution you are offering to us if we are not pleased with work done by TT?
I do not think you are! So, bad comparison! Sorry!

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 23, 2016 at 03:25 pm

My point is the actions of anyone hired, elected or otherwise appointed to a public position are not above question.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

February 23, 2016 at 05:47 am

Hey Croat if anything I'M one of those "TT Haters" you're talking about, and it's not even that I "Hate Him", I'm just of the opinion he could do a hell of a lot more than he does to put the best product on the field every year. I think Since '61 really replied to your comment in a way many of us feel about Thompson. RC, Reynaldo and others brought up good points too.

I think TT does a pretty good (Not Great) job with the draft. He completely blew the 2011 and 2012 drafts. By the end of FA this season all that may remain is Randell Cobb and Daniels. He had 18 picks those 2 years and might end up with 2 to 4 players from those classes, depending on Hayward and Perry. If he'd hit on even 6 of the 18 (33.3%), it may have been enough. Or what might have happened had he found ANYONE other than MD Jennings? I mean really Ted, can't find anyone better than Jennings?? He's done much better the last 3 years but he's still had "Brain Farts" when he's "Overdrafted" players like Rodgers II, Thornton, (3rd rounders) Ringo and Backman last year to name a few. This is something he seems to do almost every year.

The Packers have been as successful as they've been because of a few players but MOSTLY one player, Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers has been capable of covering up the many weaknesses this team has had over the years. Hell in 2011 the managed to go 15-1 by outscoring everybody, not having a pass rush, a running game, and setting an NFL record at the time for most passing yards allowed on defense. Nick Collins was hurt week 2 of the 2011 season, HHCD was drafted in 2014 draft. Ryan Grant was hurt in week one of 2010, could have had Lynch for a 3rd or 4th but I understand passing on him. I don't understand waiting until 2013 to finally draft a RB. Desmond Bishop was hurt in the first preseason game of 2012 and TT still hasn't filled the void, not really. Finley was hurt in 2013 and again, still waiting.

This is EXACTLY what drives me and others Nuts about TT. When there's players who could be signed for reasonable amounts of $$$, even what could be considered a great deals, Thompson still refuses to partake. It's one thing if you have an awesome talent you're developing but he Packers haven't, not with the examples I mentioned. A "Great GM" wouldn't let that happen, not with the $17 million or more in cap space he seems to have in his pocket each year.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 23, 2016 at 07:48 am

It's one thing to have a plan. It's another thing to stick to it...and it's a whole different thing to be virtually inflexible in how you stick to it.

Part of my job is chemical research, and while we set out on projects to reach some ultimate goal, I never forget what a mentor once said to me (paraphrasing) "It's usually not the pursuit of the goal itself that gets you the most interesting and noteworthy results, but finding the right "side-results" to chase and taking them to their ends that is the most satisfying."

Here, draft and develop is the ultimate project and finding the right FA to add to the mix would be those "side-results". I think TT is so reluctant to follow some of the side-results (meaning FAs) that he's missing some of very noteworthy outcomes.

0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

February 23, 2016 at 09:50 pm

Excellent Dobbler, very well put.

0 points
0
0
RVAborn's picture

February 23, 2016 at 11:06 pm

You bring up many excellent points. It seems to be a general consensus amongst "TT haters" that he is quite good at drafting, but when he misses, it's the glaring holes (as in bottom 5 of league) supplemented with low round picks and undrafted rookies that take YEARS to fill until finally the right guy is there to draft. When that position is finally rectified, another glaring hole appears. All I'm asking is to compensate for missed draft picks with a mid-tier guy that can be adequate-to-good, versus hoping every undrafted free agent turns into a gem.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 11:26 am

Wow my friends! I did not read tgr's comment as you did Croat, but that's between you guys.

I think tgr's list of meh players can be duplicated by every NFL team. There are very few playmakers, and a lot of....guys. The key is finding the right "guys" for the system.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

February 23, 2016 at 07:40 am

We are all good, Croat. I have been fine with TT's approach for the most part. I don't think I've advocated for a FA signing with a price tag over $3 million (I guess I liked Knighton, in place of Raji, at a cost of $1.3 million more than Raji). Note that TT has been excellent at the big money FA signings to date: Pickett, Woodson, Peppers, but so-so with his mid-tier FA signings like Marquand Manuel, Chillar, and Saturday. I do think a sprinkling (1 or 2 per yr) of small (defined as say, $ vet min. to $3 million AAV) FA signings might have gotten us over the top, and would have allowed the coaches to make rookies earn their playing time and/or given the position coaches time to coach these guys up (RR, Adams, ILB) instead of anointing them before they were ready. I contend that some vet. competition would actually help the coaches to coach/motivate and develop these players. Problem is that TT has not been very good with his smaller FA signings.

03/17/14: DL Guion. Good signing. Re-signed for '15 okay.
03/15/14: LB Peppers. Big $ - not what we're addressing.
04/09/13: TE Mulligan. No contribution shoulda kept him.
05/23/12: DL Merling. Cut. No contribution.
03/30/12: DL Hargrove. Cut. No contribution.
03/23/12: OC Saturday. Bad signing. $4 million mistake.
03/23/12: DL Muir. Cut. No contribution.
08/03/11: LB Asiodu. Waived inj. in TC. No contribution.
04/26/10: SS Peprah. 1 yr/$630K for 2010. Nice FA. 2 yrs/$2.25 mill, $150K sign bonus in 2011. Contributed after Burnett went down. Cut after '11 season, wrong decision.
03/30/09: OC Preston. Cut. No contribution.
03/30/09: DB Anthony Smith. Cut, no contribution.
03/18/08: LB Chillar. 2 yr. $5.2 million. Nice FA signing - but money was smaller back then, so this probably is mid tier money in today's $. The 12/09, 4 yr. $22 mill. extension didn't work out. Cut after a yr.
03/15/07: CB Frank Walker. 1 yr, $1.24 million. Below ave. but played okay for one year and then let him walk.
05/01/06: CB Woodson. Big money - N/A.
04/26/06: DL: Kenderick Allen. IR after 2 games. Cut.
03/27/06: LB Ben Taylor, K Billy Cundiff, WR Marc Boerigter. Taylor and Cundiff failed to make the team. Wrong decision on Cundiff. Taylor played a year on STs and was let go. No/little contributions.
2005: DT Pickett. Big money signing - N/A.
2005: SS Marquand Manuel. Awful 5 yr $10 mill with $2 mill signing bonus. Cut in 2006. Again, this was mid tier+ $ in today's $.
2005: LB Raynoch Thompson, S Arturo Freeman, S Earl Little. Little unceremoniously dumped after 4 games. Other 2 didn't make the 53.
2005: OL O'Dwyer and OG Klemm. Klemm cut after 1 yr. ODwyer did not make the team.

Sure, small FA signings are possible for a reason: one team didn't think these guys were very good, so the odds should be bad. Looking at this list, one could argue that TT has done better with his waiver wire, UDFA and trades than he has with small FA signings, and those should also have small odds. Kuhn, Bigby, Shields, Tramon, Pennel, and Grant are some examples of the former, and TT should be given credit for those cheap acquisitions.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2016/02/16/revisitin...

Another purpose of my post was to address that old canard brought up all the time: GB is always able to re-sign its own guys if they want them. My own thought was that while this is essentially true, it is only because we don't have that many good FAs. Did a ton of research below, but my memory is lousy. I kept finding in-season extensions that did not show up on databases of FAs for that year, but I wasn't sure I got them all, which made things difficult. Arguably i reached a NULL RESULT. I expected to find 3 and 4 red type players getting re-signed and/or allowed to walk each year in prior years. I didn't really get that result other than in 2010 and perhaps 2011, but not in 2007 to 2009, for example.

Extended Daniels - some to '15 cap. Signed Guion. 1 red chipper.

2015: 2 red chippers re-signed. 2 greens allowed to walk.
Cobb, Bulaga. Also Guion, Raji, Richardson, Kuhn. TT let House & Tramon walk (correctly). Disliked TT's matching for Richardson, but we won't know whether TT was correct due to injury.

2014: 2 red chippers, 3 greens re-signed. 1 green allowed to walk.
Extended Nelson. Signed Shields, Raji, Quarless, Flynn, Neal, Starks, Lattimore, Banjo. Pickett, Finley, James Jones, EDS, Newhouse, Jolly, Francois, CJ Wilson all allowed to walk. 2 red chippers here.

2013: 1 elite, 1 red chipper re-signed. 1 red-, 1 green allowed to walk.
AR & CM3 extended. Jennings, Benson, Ryan Grant, Walden, Brad Jones, Woodson walked. Only Jennings was a question. TT got B. Jones and Woodson wrong, lucky Jennings turned him down. CM3's contract as an OLB is ok, but as used - as an ILB - (this is on TT and coaches), CM3 is vastly overpaid. Average as an ILB. 1 blue chipper, 1 red+ as an OLB/green as an ILB. Rest meh.

2012: 1 red extended, 1 red re-signed. 1 ST guy re-signed. Red walked.
Wells, Flynn, Finley, Howard Green, Pat Lee, Jarett Bush. TT arguably was correct on Wells, at least until he botched it by signing the terrible Jeff Saturday. Meh other than Finley, Lang (& Wells?). Extended Lang on 8/13/12 (5 yrs/$22 million). 2 or 3 reds.

2011: Extended 1 near elite, 1 red+ and 1 red. Resigned 3 greens. Allowed 1 red- to walk, bunch of green minuses to walk.
James Jones, Crosby, Cullen Jenkins, Colledge, Spitz, Korey Hall, Bigby, Kuhn, Brandon Jackson, Josh Bell, Matt Wilhelm. Extended Sitton (5 yr/33.75 mill) on 9/2/11. TT got Jenkins wrong (Jenkins signed a modest contract w Philly) and arguably he got Bigby wrong. He got JJ and Crosby right. None of these guys were worth big $ other than Finley, Nelson and Sitton. Lots of meh. Extended Nelson (3 yrs/$13 mill). Gave an insane 5 yr/$33.75 mill deal to AJ Hawk on 3/7/11, including $11 mill ($8 mill signing bonus, $1.8 roster bonus, $1.15 base) just in 2011. 1 red chipper walked, Nelson and Sitton were the 2nd and 3rd red chippers.

2010: 1 elite, 1 red+, 1 red, 1 red minus. One red allowed to walk.
Nick Collins extended 3 yr $23.4 million, $14 mill guaranteed.
Clifton (3 yr/$19 mill), Pickett (4 yr/$25 mill) Tauscher (2yr./$8.3 mill).
Aaron Kampman, Ahman Green, allowed to walk. 1 blue, 1 red+, 1 red, 1 red- signed, another red in Kampman, square peg in the 3-4, walked. That is the problem I'd like to have with managing the cap.

2007, 08. 09. Usually 1 or 2 red chippers.

http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/green-bay-packers-2013-free-agency-tracker
http://allgbp.com/2012/01/19/green-bay-packers-free-agency-rating-the-pa...
http://allgbp.com/2012/01/16/quick-thoughts-on-the-packers-2012-free-age...
http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2011/7/26/2294357/the-official-list-of...

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 12:31 pm

I knew you'll understand me. I did not attack you. I respect you better!

0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

February 23, 2016 at 03:55 pm

"GB is always able to re-sign its own guys if they want them. My own thought was that while this is essentially true, it is only because we don't have that many good FAs."

This is big time relevant to compensatory picks. There are only a handful of top tier GM's that show up in the lower rounds (3 and 4) consistently, and GB is not one of them.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

February 24, 2016 at 01:36 am

As a note regarding TT and FAs, I realize that I have no frame of reference. I don't follow any other team, so I have no control group.

TT has been here 11 seasons. By my list above, he has brought in 25 name FAs. Is that a lot? Medium? Low number? IDK. TT brought in 12 of them in 2005 and 2006, and (just?) 13 over the last 9 years. Same question: is that a lot or a little? I think TT went 3 for3 on big FA signings (Pickett, Woodson & Peppers), and perhaps 2 for 4 on mid level FA signings (Chillar, Saturday, Manual, maybe Walker). On the cheap FAs, Guion & Peprah were good, Klemm played, even started, some games.

I am pushing a bit for a FA signing this year, someone for low starting type money or less. I don't think Raji, Perry, Neal, Starks, Tolzien, if they walk, will fetch much in terms of comp picks. Hayward might get a decent offer, worth maybe a 4th but more likely a 5th rd. comp pick. I think with Sitton, Lang, Bakh, Peppers, Lacy, maybe Datone and Tretter - depending on how they play - and Hyde (all UFAs next year) constitutes a much bigger pool of quality UFAs for 2017, and I would not want to mess up our comp picks by signing someone next year. TT will probably sign some of them, and he can target FAs that don't implicate the comp pick. Still, that is a significant limitation.

0 points
0
0
scullyitsme's picture

February 22, 2016 at 09:50 am

I like Ted Thompson, But

He's a little like my grampa...You know the one who is really hard working, does everything with precise detail, love him to death, but when your at a restaurant, he decides he's paying the bill you cringe when he pulls out the football shaped coin purse to leave the tip.,, 75 cents on a 20$ meal or something. That to me, is Ted Thompson

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

February 22, 2016 at 10:55 am

lol

0 points
0
0
J0hn Denver's Gavel's picture

February 22, 2016 at 07:19 pm

gold, Jerry, GOLD!

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

February 22, 2016 at 10:59 am

Jason - TT has certainly done a solid job as the Packers GM during his tenure. However, as mention in your last paragraph, you have ended up where you started in trying to figure out TT. The same can be said of our Packers. TT arrived and within 2 seasons he transformed them into a contending franchise and that is where they have remained except for the 2010 SB season. Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have the team and the record we've had for the last 10 seasons then be where we were during the 70s and 80s. However, we need to question how many other GMs would not have brought in another WR during the 2015 season when it was obvious from the Denver game on that our passing game and our QB needed better options at WR, not to mention at TE all season. We all know that ILB has been a consistent problem for 3-4 seasons at least and has yet to be addressed effectively. Yes, we make the playoffs every season, but we remain one or two plays away from the SB. Could the addition of a veteran player at ILB or TE or DL have made those one or two plays? Could a veteran have prevented one or two of our playoff games from going into OT and then losing in OT? Could the addition of an FA have meant one or two more regular season wins, which would have provided us with a better playoff seeding and have avoided some of those OT games on the road and and an easier path to the SB? We'll never know. But we do know when we consistently depend on young players to step up in big games at critical times they are at a disadvantage to their more experienced opponents especially during the playoffs. And if we look, just at the last few playoff losses we find that we have been undone by some of our younger players trying to make plays at critical times. Bostick and Clinton Dix in the collapse at Seattle in the NFCG, 2014. Micah Hyde dropping the pick against SF in 2013. Randall failing to cover the Cardinals Fitzgerald in Arizona in OT this season. I don't blame it all on these plays or players, but younger players tend to make more mistakes than veterans. Finally and maybe most importantly, over the last 12 games of 2015 including the 2 playoff games, the Packers went 5-7. Expand that to a 16 game season and the Packers are 6-10 or 7-9 at best, hardly a playoff contending record. Yes, injuries, poor communications and some coaching ineptitude contributed to the poor performance following the bye week but isn't this also a reflection of TT's failure to do anything to improve the team. What if he added another WR, or TE or ILB? For the first time in a long time the Packers did not play better during the second half of the season. They were noticeably worse on offense. Just like the players, TT needs to step up during the course of a season when injuries become a factor in the on field results. During the offseason he needs to find the best players to get us to the SB. Sorry for the long post, but while I appreciate what TT has done for the Packers I also need to question what might have been with some slight adjustments in the approach from time to time. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

February 23, 2016 at 09:19 am

Since 61, Another gem of a post. Great summary of what many of us have thought.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 11:19 am

He's in a position that should be shrouded in mystery. A GM needs to quietly go about the job of being competitive every year. The only things a "look behind the curtain" get you is temporary fan satisfaction and information provided to your opponent.

0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

February 22, 2016 at 11:43 am

If Ragland and Lee both fell to the packers who would TT grab? The new school player or old school player?

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 12:10 pm

Walter Football, updated today, has Ragland at #20 to the Jets and Lee #23 to the Vikings (Hunter Henry to the Packers). Prefer Ragland currently, bigger and stronger. Lee is listed at 6'1", 228 lbs; Ragland 6'2", 254.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 22, 2016 at 01:32 pm

Ragland is too slow to be a 3 down player and Lee is one of the softest Linebackers I've ever seen play football so I'd rather take a DL and sign a veteran ILB who is not to pricey until a different player can be developed. One like Rolando McClain who I think has turned his life around and would do well in a place like Green Bay.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 22, 2016 at 01:39 pm

Agree on Ragland. He looks like a two-down thumper, which is a position that doesn't get a lot of play in the current NFL. I'm a little higher on Lee than you, apparently, but that's because I see him as more of a hybrid SS/ILB than as a pure ILB. Either way, he'll test through the roof and never make it to the Packers.

0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

February 22, 2016 at 01:44 pm

I agree. The value of Lee is about to sky rocket. I also think it would dramatically change our defense if we grabbed Butler or Billings for the DL and somehow got Brothers or Scooby in round 2. Our defense would be pretty freakin stout. Clay on one side Peppers and Elliot on the other sheesh..

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 22, 2016 at 07:58 pm

While I have my doubts about Brothers or Scooby in coverage, any of those four guys would help this defense from day one.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

February 22, 2016 at 07:28 pm

I like hybrid safety/linebackers too. I just don't like ones that are as adverse to tackling as Lee.

0 points
0
0
calabasa's picture

February 22, 2016 at 11:59 am

Draft and develop works pretty well for us, overall. But then there's that moment when a rookie is in the pivotal position, and makes a rookie mistake, like not following Fitzgerald. Live by your rookies, die by your rookies.

*edit*- pretty much what Since '61 said up there.

0 points
0
0
calabasa's picture

February 22, 2016 at 12:02 pm

What drives me nuts is that TT has done the hardest part- drafted an elite QB. One of the best QB's to ever play the game! Now it seems he needs to fill the glaring holes that we've been talking about- ILB, TE- and there are easy short-term solutions staring him in the face that would be obvious upgrades. Then he stays conservative and refuses to entertain 1- or 2-year loans on a difference-maker. Just mind-blowing.

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

February 22, 2016 at 12:10 pm

IMHO what sets Ted apart is simply, the Packers are the only team without an owner with deep pockets. Pockets that say, we will pay in the future with big money but take just a little now so we can add more top players.
Ted, no I have no deep pockets I pay as I go and must resign my people to cheap contracts, pass up free agents who could come in and help immediately but want the big bucks and yes, stay with the 3 4 because its the cheapest defense to field, not requiring expensive DE contracts.
Its all about managing what money he has.
His problem he gave the absolute farm away on Rogers and Mathews to the point he has nothing really in the tank for other top people.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

February 23, 2016 at 07:57 am

al bundy got 2 likes. This opinion is simply wrong. Deep pocketed owner makes no difference in a salary cap NFL. GB has a state of the art stadium and facilities.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 12:27 pm

Slightly off topic, since the Pennel thread seems dead.

Why isn't the NFL and NFLPA out in front of progressive drug use by players? Instead of punishing players for attempting to get through the rigors of a season, why not get doctors to administer whatever is the best treatment? Why do we condone pain numbing injections (thus aggregating injuries) but punish guys for using marijuana, which is more effective for pain with no side effects?

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 22, 2016 at 12:33 pm

Aaargh, proofreading. Aggravating, not aggregating.

0 points
0
0
J0hn Denver's Gavel's picture

February 22, 2016 at 07:38 pm

Edit button, brother.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 12:13 pm

It was unavailable, but thanks anyway.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 23, 2016 at 08:00 am

I'm going to hate going here, but...

"which is more effective for pain with no side effects?"

Bullsh!#.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 12:12 pm

I guess you weren't partaking at those AC/DC concerts (smile)!

Brevity prevents clarity: Pain killers have long term health effects and and addiction issues. Marijuana has neither.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

February 23, 2016 at 12:39 pm

It would be foolish to argue that they are anywhere near the amplitude of many prescription pain killers, but Marijuana does indeed have long term health effects and addiction issues. To deny is to be willfully ignorant.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 23, 2016 at 04:22 pm

Any time you burn something and breathe in the vapors, it's not a good thing.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

February 23, 2016 at 12:36 pm

Yeah, as a one-time stoner of near-legendary status (in decades of retirement), I can state with some authority that marijuana's proficiency as an analgesic is nestled somewhere below a 200mg dose of aspirin or ibuprofen, but markedly higher than a Jello pudding pop.

Anyone suggesting tokin' on a joint is "more effective for pain" than a shot of cortisone into an inflamed joint is clearly stoned out of their gourd.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 03:14 pm

I wish (the gourd part). There are other ways to ingest the needed item for medicinal purposes other than toking.

My inclusion of more effective was more for..."affect"? Nevertheless, we've got guys using the synthetic stuff (jumping out hotel windows) because the natural is off limits.

The main point is: Why not explore the benefits of HGH, herb, or any other methods that might help these guys, instead of the hypocrisy of using drugs that we know cause problems.

0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

February 23, 2016 at 03:46 pm

"marijuana's proficiency as an analgesic is nestled somewhere below a 200mg dose of aspirin or ibuprofen, but markedly higher than a Jello pudding pop."

Do you have anything closer to science to support your statement?? --- I didn't think so. ---- Too much opinion, not enough facts.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 05:30 pm

Easy, I'm not going to knock an old time stoner. We need their help for a more enlightened society.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

February 23, 2016 at 08:00 pm

I ingested enough pot in my time, as have so many people I have known, to know that when I gashed my hand at work, or broke my finger with an errant hammer blow, or threw out my back, or when I severed the tendons in my ring finger, or when I had severe carpal tunnel, etc and so forth- I never once said, "Never mind the aspirin, oxycodone, cortisone, etc etc.... Just pass me the Dutchie to the left hand side."

I'll tell you what, Samson, you show me actual science that shows how effective Marijuana is for general pain relief. I'm not worried, because it isn't very effective. Right now, the two most documented, scientifically validated uses for medical marijuana are to relieve pressure build up in the eyes for glaucoma, and as an appetite stimulant. Yes, there's lots of 'promising' studies for various other things, but they are just that, promising studies, at this time. Not on the list of scientifically confirmed uses for marijuana: Awesome pain killer.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 10:12 pm

It's also being grown for distillation of oil to help with seizures. I know someone doing this in Colorado.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 05:38 pm

Hypothetically speaking, you might be pleasantly surprised if you came out of retirement. Hypothetically speaking, great advances in potency have occurred since the late 70s, early 80s era. Hypothetically of course.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

February 23, 2016 at 08:08 pm

Not hypothetically speaking, no; great advances in potency haven't occurred. Average potency is up because there's wider spread growers with access to better genetic stock than was available to the massess, generally speaking, back in the 70's and 80's. But good pot then is basically the same as good pot now. It was just harder to come by. The classic strains when cultivated appropriately back in the day were every bit as potent as those crosses etc grown today. Majority of modern advances are in terms of ability to produce more, in less time, in less space, in various climates (thanks to advances in indoor growing technique.)

Now, if you're talking about wax and all that garbage? No thanks. I'm not interested in "rehashing" my youth to begin with, but I'll definitely pass on the processed products that use things like butane as a distillate.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 10:08 pm

Don't know anything about wax. Your points seem logical, and higher quality is definely more widely available. However, it also seems logical that the ability to grow legally is producing better cross strains, just as farmers continue to use better seed corn, wheat, etc.

One of the most interesting things is product in California is labeled according to the physical/mental problems it helps.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

February 24, 2016 at 02:11 am

Thanks for the humorous posts, WKU and Oppy. Hypothetically speaking, I might have some anecdotal and experiential evidence to submit, but it sounds like scientific evidence is the base requirement. I think that any drug that breaks down inhibitions can be a gateway drug. I know for sure in my own case that vanilla ice cream is a gateway substance to chocolate syrup, whip cream, and cherries, but that might just be me.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 24, 2016 at 08:42 am

You're welcome! No scientific evidence necessary to join in, but it's all hypothetical of course (but you may now have an idea of one the basis for my hypothetical disdain for the police).

0 points
0
0
mrtundra's picture

February 22, 2016 at 01:41 pm

No one knows what TT will do on draft day. Look at last year's draft if you have any doubts. We needed an ILB and TT drafted DBs with GB's 1st two picks. Those two DBs looked pretty good last season. TT knows what GB needs and he'd rather draft and develop than go to FA to fill a need. As for me, I've learned to trust TT and Company, especially on draft day.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

February 22, 2016 at 01:49 pm

The Draft and Develop and the lack of partcipation in FA of Thompson isn't really the issue but the selections of players at crucial rounds for the filling of positions of need or simply ignoring any position of need in any draft of the last 5 years.
This doesn't mean a total failure but the failures are too many in any round based on expectations of each rounds value.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 22, 2016 at 01:54 pm

Who's on first? ;)

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

February 22, 2016 at 03:17 pm

What....I don't know....because...why

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

February 22, 2016 at 02:33 pm

Taryn - your point is getting at a significant piece of the dilemma. Draft and develop is an excellent way to proceed when you are drafting in the top 15 or maybe even 20 rounds. When you have become successful as the Packers have and you are consistently drafting in rounds 24 and above draft and develop should be continued but a light bulb should go off somewhere that you are not going to get the level of players needed to consistently maintain or get to the next level, (i.e., the Super Bowl) without some supplemental FA signings and this is where IMO TT has been less than good during his GM tenure in Green Bay. Yes, he has signed some FAs and we have seen, in the case of Charles Woodson, the difference an experienced FA can make. Woodson is a good example of the type of player who can make those one or two plays over the course of the playoffs and over a season that get a team to the SB or a higher playoff seeding during the regular season. In 2014 we saw J. Peppers make a play against Dallas that saved a playoff game and helped us advance to the next round. So we know TT can make good FA signings, the frustration is why are they so far apart? Favorable contracts can be designed, as is the case with Sam Shields recent contract, that are favorable to the Packers. Put most of the guaranteed money in the first 1-2 seasons. If the player fails to perform in the later years cut him with little exposure to the salary cap. There is more than one way to build a team and where there is a will there is a way. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

February 22, 2016 at 03:13 pm

Getting the right FA is essential but it should be to aid/assist in the growth of those drafted and not to fill positions that were given multiple years of camp to do so. Doing such acknowledges a too often failure in the assumed early rd selection and the learning curve of any round player that is the defining fact of success for the draft&develop.
The where we draft is an over used reason for failure when players drafted lower have higher success on other teams. There are factors to be considered but for the Packers of late, it's more of simply not succeeding in the scouting via the scouts and Thompson himself and his having final say so.

0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

February 22, 2016 at 02:18 pm

I think Ted surprises everyone and gets some veteran help in free agency , there's always a first.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

February 22, 2016 at 05:11 pm

back to square one. TT will draft someone cow hates.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

February 22, 2016 at 06:24 pm

Thinking about TT trolling Cow gives me a serious case of the laughs!

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 05:40 pm

That would be fantastic!

0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

February 22, 2016 at 05:55 pm

Let me start with; Trust in Ted.

Building through draft is all good and all, but if you have the so-so to deplorable record of hits beyond the round 4 that TT has, grabbing bunches in these rounds that do not materialize…well is just stubborn. OK, before you say anything, I don’t care about the rest of the NFL! I’m baffled, at the stubbornness here in TT’s psyche. Granted he knows talent far better then Mike Sherman ever did. Brent Favre felt and lived the brunt of Sherman’s lack of vision. Yes, Mike Sherman did waste the best years of Brett Favres’ career. And like the rest of you; are concerned the same is being bestowed upon Arron Rodgers. The list of hits beyond round 4 is small; COREY LINSLEY, MICAH HYDE, DAVID BAKHTIARI, MIKE DANIELS, T.J. LANG, JOSH SITTON. Yet I was under the impression that later rounds are meant for bench specialist. What does he have to show for that; DAVON HOUSE, JAMES STARKS, MATT FLYNN, ANDREW QUARLESS, J.C. TRETTER, JARRED ABBREDERIS, JEFF JANIS. Hell to many of the bench went un-drafted, and un-drafted for a reason, based on their body of work filling in this following year.

Ted needs to follow a winning model. He’s close, but he needs to take advantage of the select group the misguided general managers and personnel offered up each year by the NFL. The secret is obvious, trade down my man, trade down, again and again. Specifically in rounds 1 - 3. The rounds were I believe TT could flourishes!

Thank god for GamePass, it tells the whole story. The list currently playing at a sub-standard level is to high for a run at the SB, and it hurts too see it not continuously being reconciled.

Here’s where I have to mention what a horrible year AR had. I’ve heard that pro QB’s shouldn’t need receivers running wide open, and man he also missed a ton too…

Yes, building through the draft is the formula, proven by the number of teams at the top of the heap that follow this philosophy. But great only if continuously reconciled though, hence the New England, Seattle, Denver models. It’s frustrating to see, not only in the draft and trading market but also from game to game, plain stubbornness or whatever it is, to the vast numbers that do not pick up on winning formulas and mold them to their liking and use it. You can include Ted, MM, DC in this group.

Of course, may be this is the year!

Frustrated, bleeding green and gold…

0 points
0
0
J0hn Denver's Gavel's picture

February 22, 2016 at 08:20 pm

As the missed opportunities between QB and WRs began to amass last season, I wondered if Rodgers was losing his vision or having problems with it. Concussions can play with your vision, especially when multiple concussions even weeks or months apart (SIS) have occurred. It's just a little theory, no insider info, lol. I have experienced this phenomena myself though, unfortunately.

0 points
0
0
nostradanus's picture

February 22, 2016 at 08:56 pm

Well said and well written Jason, you hit it right on the head Lad. Ted Thompson, for all of his strange quirks and mysterious actions, is a damn good G.M. for the small market Packers. He is very frugal, calculated and he drives fans friggin crazy with his shy and reclusive manner. I for one enjoy his dry, yet witty humor.
He has fielded a very competitive team for over a decade now and he will put together a team in 2016 worthy of another playoff run I have no doubt.
He's Ted the Sledge, the White hair, or my favorite "the albino barn owl" (to quote one of the regular fan commentators, this was my favorite haha)
He's a true Packer and I am sure glad he's our G.M.
Go Pack!
NostraDANus , the Optimistic Packer mystic

0 points
0
0
Hematite's picture

February 23, 2016 at 06:09 am

We have seen the team that Ted Thompson has built when Aaron Rodgers is not on the field and it's not pretty.
Kind of reminded me of the 70's and 80's.
Ted knows that it is Aaron Rodgers that butters his bread.
It's been said that Ted likes to get rid of players a year early rather than a year late, and I think Ted gets rid of Ted just before the end of Aaron Rodgers career.
He knows that without Aaron Rodgers he has built an 8-8 team at best.
Thompson is highly overrated IMHO.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 06:28 am

You take away a top 5 QB from any team in the league and how good is the team? How good would Carolina's offense be without Cam Newton? How good would Seattle's offense be without Russell Wilson? How good would New England's offense be without Tom Brady?

0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

February 23, 2016 at 03:29 pm

Why do the homers love to compare the Pack in hypothetical situations and always use other teams in their examples ??
All of your examples are moot. --- GB without AR has nothing to do with any other team, only the Pack. --- You're letting your imagination convince yourself of facts that are completely unproven.
------ GB went 5-7 in 2015 when AR was playing lousy. -- That's a fact.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 03:55 pm

'Why do the fans love to compare the Pack in hypothetical situations and always use other teams in their examples ??'

What hypothetical situations? The topic was talked about how the rest of the team is when you take Rodgers off. Take away any good QB from their team and the team will not be the same. No matter how good the team is. That's a fact.
Look at Dallas. Without Romo they were a 4 win team. About the only team that won in spite of their QB is the Broncos. Ohh wait I'm not supposed to use other teams as an example.

Call me a homer all you want. I love and support my team. If you don't like that, to bad...

0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

February 23, 2016 at 04:26 pm

Some of you need to clearly define "love" and "hate". --- Neither have anything to do with competency when evaluating an NFL team. --- Try to remove that emotion that clouds your perception of your favorite team. --- I grew up a stone's throw from Lambeau Field. --- Winning two SBs in 45+ years makes one leery about jumping too high to support "everything" about this team.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

February 23, 2016 at 04:32 pm

The Broncos lost Manning and still won and then went back to the lesser of the two with Manning and won it all. The QB is the larger part for success but saying a team will cliff fall without him is ridiculous if the rest of the team is solid enough to hold tight....the Packers haven't been and the play after going 6-0 says so and even during the win streak it was very questionable.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

February 23, 2016 at 04:54 pm

Really Taryn? The Bronco's won with pure defense. One of the best defensive teams ever. Manning sucked, and anyone could have QBed that team. If the Bronco's had a really good QB they may have gone 19-0.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

February 23, 2016 at 05:30 pm

That's my point....the rest of the team was solid and the defense more so. The Packers without Rodgers need much to be desired to suggest an ability to hold tight it's endeavor. This justifies the chant that the team as a whole is sub standard and benefited from the lacking of those of lesser. Unless reaching the playoffs via weak division is deemed success via a false sense of power.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 06:26 pm

Perhaps you missed the part where I said the Broncos won in spite of their QB...

The Broncos are the exception not the rule.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

February 23, 2016 at 06:32 pm

Reality... Packers are 1 of 2 teams to go to 7 straight playoffs and win a Super Bowl.

Packers will be returning one of the top 5 WRs in the league. Also 3 other starting WRs that didn't play in Arizona. That will provide a huge boost to the offense. Also a motivated Lacy will provide the run game we missed.
Defense will be more experienced and better.
The arrow is pointing up with this team.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

February 23, 2016 at 08:50 pm

So...the initiator of the argument who espouses the belief that the Packers are an 8-8 team without ARod is OK. The counter "homer" argument where others are removing Russell Wilson, Cam Newton, etc., and expressing a belief that those teams would be diminished in their absence is NOT OK.

Seems to me it's fundamentally the same argument.

0 points
0
0
barutanseijin's picture

February 23, 2016 at 06:46 pm

I give him credit for not going with the herd and snatching up Aaron Rodgers with the #24 pick in 2005. However, I don't think it took a genius to pull the trigger on Rodgers. Maybe an iconoclast or a lone wolf -- and a lucky one at that -- but not necessarily a genius. If Hundley works out, that will be a more impressive pick in my book.

Since Rodgers TT has been up and down with the draft. Some good picks, some bad, some

0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

February 23, 2016 at 07:31 am

As fans we always want to say were 1 or 2 players away from that SB win. The year after the Packers won the SB, the defense proved that they were several players away. Last year, they had a hard time beating the Redskins in the playoffs! The year before they had a very healthy team and could have won it all except that Rodgers was on one leg. They should have beaten Seattle, but doubt they could have beaten the Patriots with Rodgers on one leg.
So 1 player here or there probably won't make the difference as much as keeping the team healthy and running on all cylinders. I think TT knows that and adds players that can either start in places of weakness or add depth in areas that always seem to be banged up. I hope TT keeps up with how he operates. The team needs to develop their skills/knowledge so they can become better.

0 points
0
0
LeagueObsrvr's picture

February 23, 2016 at 10:04 am

I think most of the chatter claiming the Packers "window is closing" is wishful thinking coming from the haters, particularly Viking fans. The fact is, the Packers and Rodgers are in their prime right now and can expect a high probability of continued success for many years to come.

0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

February 23, 2016 at 03:38 pm

Typical homer. -- Blame the haters (whoever they are??).

Not all football fans are either haters or lovers. ---- Many just follow football without the obsessive emotion.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

February 23, 2016 at 04:59 pm

BS, emotion is what drives any fan. You show your own by your pessimistic approach towards anyone who remains optimistic. Should every fan go to a game, duct tape their mouths and shit on their hands?

0 points
0
0
barutanseijin's picture

February 23, 2016 at 07:06 pm

That's really not true that emotion drives all fans. Emotions are always with us, but some people like the chess match aspect of the game more than the rah-rah stuff. The fantasy football folks follow the game in a less team centered, less emotional way, too. there are a lot of those folks.

0 points
0
0
RVAborn's picture

February 23, 2016 at 05:36 pm

You are absolutely right.Rodgers is still in his prime, but will he still be 5 years down the road when he's nearly 38? His escapability from the pocket and extending plays is when he's at his best/most effective. Age slowly will detioriate that skill. My point is lets get a guy or 2 to fill a void where the draft has missed and complete this team while Rodgers is still at his best.

0 points
0
0
barutanseijin's picture

February 23, 2016 at 07:19 pm

Rodgers didn't seem as eager to run this year. Some of that ability may already be eroding. And considering that draft picks at many positions will need a year or two to develop, there's really only a year or two left to make picks that will make a difference for a Packer team with Rodgers at QB. I think you have to think about stepping up your game and acquiring difference makers by any and all means.

0 points
0
0
barutanseijin's picture

February 23, 2016 at 06:59 pm

How do we know you're not just a hater trying to whip up support for a GM you don't respect? You know, like Packer fans who supported Angelo or Matt Millen...

0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

February 23, 2016 at 03:35 pm

TT is only average.
MM (and his crony coaching staff) are only average.

This GB team is and has been carried by AR since 2008. --- When AR is out (hurt) or playing lousy, this team is no better than 8-8 (or less). --- These are the facts, not my opinion.

AR has carried the careers of both TT & MM for years. --- Just think what might have been since 2010 if the Pack had a better GM & coaching staff in place.

0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

February 24, 2016 at 11:36 am

All this talk of 'the window closing on Arron Rodgers' or that the Packers have another 7 years plus of Rodgers behind center.

I'll through you a wrinkle; Tom Brady gone via retirement in 2 years, Arron Rodgers gone in 2 years via free agency to the New England Patriots.

A move to a top tier winning model, makes sense to me...

0 points
0
0
RVAborn's picture

February 25, 2016 at 01:29 am

Tom Brady gets a constant influx of talent in an attempt to plug holes via all facets of player acquisition .Rodgers only gets rookies. Also, Brady is as pure as a pocket passer gets-he's a statue- it's what he's done his entire career. Conversely, while Rodgers is effective in the pocket, hes at his best extending plays. Age will unfortunately mitigate that mobility attribute, and only time will tell how much it affects his play.

0 points
0
0