The 2007 team was probably more like a 10-6 team, overachieving a bit, IMO. That team went 5-1 in games decided by 7 points or less.
The 2008 team is probably more like a 9-7 team that flat out underachieved. This team went 1-5 in games decided by 7 points or less.
Some people say its skill to win those close games, some say its luck. I say it's a little of both. Just remember the old adage of "you aren't as good as you think you are, and you aren't as bad as you think you are". The talent on these 2 teams is more similar than people want to think. This team needs better everything right now: better coaching, better play from veterans, better play from young players, and a little more talent. This whole organization needs to improve this offseason. Hopefully we can see the improvement in the 2009 season.
quote:Originally posted by who:
Let's play a what-if scenario. Let's say that TT has decided to go after Haynesworth or Peppers. Just one of them, though. Who would you recommend for him to choose?
I'd rather have Peppers. They're both good but I think Peppers is a little better
Why do I have this sinking feeling there will not be any coaching changes??
Peppers goes all out on every play. Haynesworth takes plays off.
quote:Originally posted by Music City:
Thompson made a major gamble by trading away their DT depth.
Keeping Corey Williams would not have solved the Packers defensive woes (with or without Jenkins). I think the combination of the two certainly hurt as one is a starter and the other was a srong back-up/rotational guy.
Wait another year, Utopia is here.
Al Harris-ruptured spleen, Charles Woodson....lots of injuries.
That alone is some pretty significant injuries.
That alone is some pretty significant injuries.
quote:Originally posted by Boris:quote:Originally posted by who:
Let's play a what-if scenario. Let's say that TT has decided to go after Haynesworth or Peppers. Just one of them, though. Who would you recommend for him to choose?
I'd rather have Peppers. They're both good but I think Peppers is a little better
Why do I have this sinking feeling there will not be any coaching changes??
If no one goes I think McCarthy is giving himself 2009 only to right the ship. I think if they lose one of the last three Sanders will have to go. My thinking there is none of these last three teams is considered as any kind of an offensive juggernaut. If GB puts up 24 or more they should win each game.
My concern with Sanders getting canned is that McCarthy promotes a crony from within. Moss, who seems like a nice guy but the LB play digressed this year and he has no DC experience. And I have not heard anyone mention him as a hot commodity / up and comer. Or worse, Schottenheimer gets the move because he has been a DC in the past with moderate success. I think Schott is okay right where he is, but Jerry help us if he gets promoted.
Another crony option that will likely be available and is better than the three mentioned above is Jim Haslett. Haslett has always been a good DC but never seemed to cut it as a HC. The NO teams he and McCarthy coached together were pretty good with less talent than the Packers have.
Recognizing the problem (Sanders) is 75% of the solution. Just don't **** up the last 25%.
KGB - Absolutely not an excuse! Everyone knew he was hurt late last season, and wasn't able to participate in the off-season program. Ted struck out trying to get another year out of a broken down vet. Hold him accountable for that. He's a big boy. He can take it.
Harrell - any of you counting on him were as foolish as Thompson. This was the backup plan to letting Williams go? A big mistake. Including college, the guy has been hurt for 4 of the last 5 seasons.
Bigby - sure, his loss hurts not only the time lost, but he's not the same player. Rouse is a decent backup. But the team's problems start in the trenches.
One injury crippled the DL! That doesn't say a lot for the management. Look at the Giants.
Barnett - Interesting that he is being brought up his week 10 injury considering the water was pouring through the dam already!
Grant - again, not worth bringing up as a way of exhonerating the GM....his injury was a direct result of the Packers not getting him into camp on time.
Clifton - useless to bring him up too! Week 9, all Colledge did was help the Packers OL neutralize one of the best DLs in the game. Clifton wasn't missed that day, and it further showed that they have been trying to shoehorn a Tackle into a guard spot in Colledge. Clifton has been playing through injuries for YEARS now. All of a sudden, it's an excuse? Playing through is a part of the game.
Lots of other knicks and bumps that are listed. That's a part of the NFL. Guys play hurt all season. Guys miss a week here or there.
The point is....they didn't field a team from the start that could compete. They took short cuts - trying to stretch KGB and get Bustin on the field. They got burned. Injuries crop up all across the NFL. If you can't figure out a way to get through them, you won't last. Hold the GM accountable. He was Exec of the Year last year. And did nothing to improve areas that were concerning - (the pass rush, the OL, TE, Punter) to name a few. He sat with $25M in coin and several tradeable picks and didn't fill the holes or get quality depth.
Harrell - any of you counting on him were as foolish as Thompson. This was the backup plan to letting Williams go? A big mistake. Including college, the guy has been hurt for 4 of the last 5 seasons.
Bigby - sure, his loss hurts not only the time lost, but he's not the same player. Rouse is a decent backup. But the team's problems start in the trenches.
One injury crippled the DL! That doesn't say a lot for the management. Look at the Giants.
Barnett - Interesting that he is being brought up his week 10 injury considering the water was pouring through the dam already!
Grant - again, not worth bringing up as a way of exhonerating the GM....his injury was a direct result of the Packers not getting him into camp on time.
Clifton - useless to bring him up too! Week 9, all Colledge did was help the Packers OL neutralize one of the best DLs in the game. Clifton wasn't missed that day, and it further showed that they have been trying to shoehorn a Tackle into a guard spot in Colledge. Clifton has been playing through injuries for YEARS now. All of a sudden, it's an excuse? Playing through is a part of the game.
Lots of other knicks and bumps that are listed. That's a part of the NFL. Guys play hurt all season. Guys miss a week here or there.
The point is....they didn't field a team from the start that could compete. They took short cuts - trying to stretch KGB and get Bustin on the field. They got burned. Injuries crop up all across the NFL. If you can't figure out a way to get through them, you won't last. Hold the GM accountable. He was Exec of the Year last year. And did nothing to improve areas that were concerning - (the pass rush, the OL, TE, Punter) to name a few. He sat with $25M in coin and several tradeable picks and didn't fill the holes or get quality depth.
Beer Guy -- excellent post. You should add cutting Ryan and signing Frost to this list as another example of player personnel mistakes, ughh.
In addition MM and his lieutenants proved amazingly stubborn when it came time to adjust to these shortcomings and their on-the-field consequences. As contrasted to last year. What MM did on the offensive side of the ball last year as the season unfolded seemed revelatory (Big 5, heavy backfields, etc.), adjusting to his team's strengths and weaknesses. Haven't seen that this year.
In addition MM and his lieutenants proved amazingly stubborn when it came time to adjust to these shortcomings and their on-the-field consequences. As contrasted to last year. What MM did on the offensive side of the ball last year as the season unfolded seemed revelatory (Big 5, heavy backfields, etc.), adjusting to his team's strengths and weaknesses. Haven't seen that this year.
The defensive injuries exasperated the problems of having an unimaginative defensive coordinator. When you have injuries to starters, you need to replace them with backups who are obviously not starting material. There is a talent fall-off. That's understood. But if your defensive coordinator cannot figure out a new plan of action, you have seasons like this. I also think the Packers--on defense, at least--look listless, uninterested, etc. Where's the fire?
Additionally, you cannot expect a GM to stock his roster with starting material players on 2nd and 3rd team. No one does this, no one can do this. There are not enough good players in the league to even handle that possibility. Did you see that list of Free Agent DEs and DTs? That's just part of the game. Did Dallas have a capable backup qb? No.
JJSD summed it up perfectly in a post of his a week or so back. Every year you make some educated guesses, you take some chances on believing certain things will work out. Last year, all of those things panned out for the Packers. This year they haven't, and pretty brutally. The simple matter is, You don't know until you know, if you get what I'm saying. Harrell, for instance, really hasn't been injury-free until late last year, and then he got injured again. As a business person who's invested heavily in the guy, you don't just cut him without seeing him perform. If Harrell was a 7th rounder, he might be gone, but he's not, because financially they want to give him opportunities because they've invested a hell of a lot in him. TT has proven, though, that he will cut ties when players aren't working out.
Finally, you don't need a whole lot of injuries to cause a lot of problems, to make a good team look awfully ordinary, or worse. Aikman said that in a game the other week. Jenkins injury was a big killer, because KGB also fell apart. KGB did have 9.5 sacks last year at this time. He was productive. Why wouldn't TT bring him back? That one-two loss has hurt pretty badly, along with Harrell not assuming his intended position as DT. Cole and Jolly have also looked not as good as a year ago. Why is that? I have nothing to base my speculations on, nothing concrete, really, but it just looks like these guys have given up on the scheme, or something. They look really uninterested, and it's showing in horrible defensive performances.
TT's biggest mistake to me was the punting situation. That was absolutely stupid.
Additionally, you cannot expect a GM to stock his roster with starting material players on 2nd and 3rd team. No one does this, no one can do this. There are not enough good players in the league to even handle that possibility. Did you see that list of Free Agent DEs and DTs? That's just part of the game. Did Dallas have a capable backup qb? No.
JJSD summed it up perfectly in a post of his a week or so back. Every year you make some educated guesses, you take some chances on believing certain things will work out. Last year, all of those things panned out for the Packers. This year they haven't, and pretty brutally. The simple matter is, You don't know until you know, if you get what I'm saying. Harrell, for instance, really hasn't been injury-free until late last year, and then he got injured again. As a business person who's invested heavily in the guy, you don't just cut him without seeing him perform. If Harrell was a 7th rounder, he might be gone, but he's not, because financially they want to give him opportunities because they've invested a hell of a lot in him. TT has proven, though, that he will cut ties when players aren't working out.
Finally, you don't need a whole lot of injuries to cause a lot of problems, to make a good team look awfully ordinary, or worse. Aikman said that in a game the other week. Jenkins injury was a big killer, because KGB also fell apart. KGB did have 9.5 sacks last year at this time. He was productive. Why wouldn't TT bring him back? That one-two loss has hurt pretty badly, along with Harrell not assuming his intended position as DT. Cole and Jolly have also looked not as good as a year ago. Why is that? I have nothing to base my speculations on, nothing concrete, really, but it just looks like these guys have given up on the scheme, or something. They look really uninterested, and it's showing in horrible defensive performances.
TT's biggest mistake to me was the punting situation. That was absolutely stupid.
quote:Originally posted by who:
but it just looks like these guys have given up on the scheme, or something. They look really uninterested, and it's showing in horrible defensive performances.
Woodson and others who are always available post game for interviews were unavailable Sunday evening. A week ago after Woodson misplayed the ball on the Smith long catch late he talked to the media. This week? No talking. That says a lot.
I think the vets, the guys who have played in a few different schemes, see this for what it is. Unimaginative and plain. Works great when all your horses are healthy and firing on all cylinders. Woodson playing SS is being creative, but it took Woodson offering to do so, it was not the coaches who approached him.
Every team has injuries to overcome but it takes creative / smart coaches to optimize what they have to work with. Sanders just can't do it. Maybe he'd grow into the ability if he was younger, but time has run out him getting experience.
You seem like a nice guy Bob, but so long.
quote:Originally posted by nerdmann:
Peppers goes all out on every play. Haynesworth takes plays off.
http://www.nfl.com/players/juliuspeppers/profile?id=PEP422041
You don't know what the hell you are ever talking about. Peppers had 2.5 sacks last year as the "premier" player. Their defense is just average and not a guy you gameplan against. Great DT's allow the LB's to make plays as Tenn's do. Sorry but Haynesworth's value overshadow's Peppers. Besides, on is set to be a FA and the other franchised.
There are some similarities between the 2005 team and the 2008 team. Both have had injury issues and lack-of-talent issues. Hopefully TT can right this ship, because the Packers are a joke right now.
Sure there are a couple of decent names, but hardly an impressive menu...
All I can think of looking at that list are things like:
Marquad Manuel
Joe Johnson
Hardy Nickerson
Nick Luchey
Hannibal Navies
Mark Roman
Wesley Walls
Eric Metcalf
Seth Joyner
All I can think of looking at that list are things like:
Marquad Manuel
Joe Johnson
Hardy Nickerson
Nick Luchey
Hannibal Navies
Mark Roman
Wesley Walls
Eric Metcalf
Seth Joyner
quote:Originally posted by BeerGuy:
KGB - Absolutely not an excuse! Everyone knew he was hurt late last season, and wasn't able to participate in the off-season program. Ted struck out trying to get another year out of a broken down vet. Hold him accountable for that. He's a big boy. He can take it.
Bull****...9.5 sacks last season and played in 15 games. He had a routine surgery in the offseason and should have been able to at least be serviceable. He was useless. No one could have predicted is drop off would have been that steep.
quote:Harrell - any of you counting on him were as foolish as Thompson. This was the backup plan to letting Williams go? A big mistake. Including college, the guy has been hurt for 4 of the last 5 seasons.
Again, no one predicted the guy would get hurt. Initially it looked like his back injury looked like it would be something that would get better after the surgery and he'd be ready for training camp. He didn't get better and we went into the season with 3 DTs instead of 4. I'm so freaking sick of the Corey Williams crap, Colin Cole has performed just as well as Williams has this season. Get over it, that's a lame ass excuse to dump on Thompson.
quote:Bigby - sure, his loss hurts not only the time lost, but he's not the same player. Rouse is a decent backup. But the team's problems start in the trenches.
Bigby was big in run D and him not being there hurt.
quote:One injury crippled the DL! That doesn't say a lot for the management. Look at the Giants.
Your opinion doesn't say a lot about your intelligence.
quote:Barnett - Interesting that he is being brought up his week 10 injury considering the water was pouring through the dam already!
It's still a starter going down. His loss has forced an already dinged up Hawk to shift to an unfamiliar position.
quote:Grant - again, not worth bringing up as a way of exhonerating the GM....his injury was a direct result of the Packers not getting him into camp on time.
Oh please, this is a joke. It's the Packers fault he injured his hamstring? Get real.
quote:Clifton - useless to bring him up too! Week 9, all Colledge did was help the Packers OL neutralize one of the best DLs in the game. Clifton wasn't missed that day, and it further showed that they have been trying to shoehorn a Tackle into a guard spot in Colledge. Clifton has been playing through injuries for YEARS now. All of a sudden, it's an excuse? Playing through is a part of the game.
Again, it's losing a starter. YOU CAN'T HAVE STARTERS GO DOWN AND EXPECT EVERYTHING TO BE AS IT WAS. A starter going down means you have a backup playing.
quote:Lots of other knicks and bumps that are listed. That's a part of the NFL. Guys play hurt all season. Guys miss a week here or there.
Knicks and bumps aren't the GM's fault.
quote:The point is....they didn't field a team from the start that could compete. They took short cuts - trying to stretch KGB and get Bustin on the field. They got burned. Injuries crop up all across the NFL. If you can't figure out a way to get through them, you won't last. Hold the GM accountable. He was Exec of the Year last year. And did nothing to improve areas that were concerning - (the pass rush, the OL, TE, Punter) to name a few. He sat with $25M in coin and several tradeable picks and didn't fill the holes or get quality depth.
No your point is that you will take any excuse to dump on the GM even though your reasons are things out of his control. We fielded the exact same team as last year and offseason and inseason injuries have destroyed our season. That's the gods honest truth, deal with it.
Grave Digger....a few things.
Yes, we fielded the same team as last year. The same team that was dominated in the trenches against the Giants. The same team that struggled with a pass rush for good parts of the season. The same interior offensive line that was a liability in pass protection. Resources were not used to alleviate any of that. Ted's choice, and my choice to call him on it.
To answer the pass rush that was marginal, they traded one of the key pass rushers and replaced him with a bust. And they decided to give another try with KGB. KGB was not himself late last season - after being injured - ZERO SACKS to go with THREE TACKLES after getting hurt in the regular season. Then he was unavailable all off-season. No actions were made to fix that. They counted on a broken down, old vet. You want to exhonorate Thompson for that - fine. I'll hold them accountable in the same way that he was praised last season as Exec. of the Year. He's a big boy. He can take it.
Interesting enough, 5 of his 9.5 sacks were against Turnstill McKinney. I bet he wishes he played him each week.
On Grant:
The guy arrived and they worked him into shape. If they don't slow play him in the contract, does he have more time to get into shape without injury? Perhaps. You want to give Ted a pass on the season because players got injured, it's just as legit to question why they hell they slow played a player on his contract that needed the reps, and when they came in bulk, his hamstring stretched out.
On Harrell:
Four out of five years of being hurt.....one might have been able to guess that the guy was a stretch to count on. Again...Ted rolled the dice. Had it worked out, I'd praise him. It didn't so he takes the blame. He's a big boy.
On Clifton:
I have no idea what you are trying to prove with bringing up Clifton missing one game in which he wasn't missed. Especially with the career he's had of playing through injuries.
Injuries happen. But they didn't go out to improve the 13-3 team - a team that despite the record, had some holes to it. The "youngest" team in the NFL we were sold had a ton of young talent collapsed this season.
All I'm doing is grading the GM for what he did or didn't do. I'm happy to give him credit where it is due also (sticking with Tramon Williams). I'm sure I'm not hurting his feelings. You are using injuries as a pass. I won't do that to the extent you will. I certainly understand that guys can go down and it can be hard to recover. However, if you don't take steps to improve in the off-season, it won't matter anyway.
Yes, we fielded the same team as last year. The same team that was dominated in the trenches against the Giants. The same team that struggled with a pass rush for good parts of the season. The same interior offensive line that was a liability in pass protection. Resources were not used to alleviate any of that. Ted's choice, and my choice to call him on it.
To answer the pass rush that was marginal, they traded one of the key pass rushers and replaced him with a bust. And they decided to give another try with KGB. KGB was not himself late last season - after being injured - ZERO SACKS to go with THREE TACKLES after getting hurt in the regular season. Then he was unavailable all off-season. No actions were made to fix that. They counted on a broken down, old vet. You want to exhonorate Thompson for that - fine. I'll hold them accountable in the same way that he was praised last season as Exec. of the Year. He's a big boy. He can take it.
Interesting enough, 5 of his 9.5 sacks were against Turnstill McKinney. I bet he wishes he played him each week.
On Grant:
quote:Oh please, this is a joke. It's the Packers fault he injured his hamstring? Get real.
The guy arrived and they worked him into shape. If they don't slow play him in the contract, does he have more time to get into shape without injury? Perhaps. You want to give Ted a pass on the season because players got injured, it's just as legit to question why they hell they slow played a player on his contract that needed the reps, and when they came in bulk, his hamstring stretched out.
On Harrell:
quote:Again, no one predicted the guy would get hurt.
Four out of five years of being hurt.....one might have been able to guess that the guy was a stretch to count on. Again...Ted rolled the dice. Had it worked out, I'd praise him. It didn't so he takes the blame. He's a big boy.
On Clifton:
quote:Again, it's losing a starter. YOU CAN'T HAVE STARTERS GO DOWN AND EXPECT EVERYTHING TO BE AS IT WAS. A starter going down means you have a backup playing.
I have no idea what you are trying to prove with bringing up Clifton missing one game in which he wasn't missed. Especially with the career he's had of playing through injuries.
Injuries happen. But they didn't go out to improve the 13-3 team - a team that despite the record, had some holes to it. The "youngest" team in the NFL we were sold had a ton of young talent collapsed this season.
All I'm doing is grading the GM for what he did or didn't do. I'm happy to give him credit where it is due also (sticking with Tramon Williams). I'm sure I'm not hurting his feelings. You are using injuries as a pass. I won't do that to the extent you will. I certainly understand that guys can go down and it can be hard to recover. However, if you don't take steps to improve in the off-season, it won't matter anyway.
I'll go back to the same argument, we went 14-4 with the exact same team we had coming into the season. Same players won last year so it's reasonable to think they could have put together a winning season this year... except... for... injuries.
The pass rush got worse... because of injuries
The Oline had to shuffle multiple times... because of injuries
The LBs had to shuffle... because of injures
Injuries have ruined the season, not Ted Thompson. Deal with it.
The pass rush got worse... because of injuries
The Oline had to shuffle multiple times... because of injuries
The LBs had to shuffle... because of injures
Injuries have ruined the season, not Ted Thompson. Deal with it.
quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:
Injuries have ruined the season, not Ted Thompson. Deal with it.
I agree GD. TT has loaded this team with talent and potential talent. Injuries and suspect coaching have killed GB this year. TT has done his job of collecting the right talent and it will show eventually. How many bozos on here wanted to AXE Will Blackmon the last few years? The guy is only a better returner than Hester now. Only the crybaby, drunk, fantasy gms in packerland think they could do a better job at GM.
Beer Guy, Weren't you the same one who called Evridge a stud starter at Wisconsin? How's that playing out for you?
quote:Originally posted by The Artist fka TD:
Beer Guy, Weren't you the same one who called Evridge a stud starter at Wisconsin? How's that playing out for you?
Nice context. I only argued that his transfer to Wisconsin wasn't anything to sneeze at (at the time) due to the numerous opportunities other schools extended him, including Oregon State. At the time, I compared it to Rhett Bomar's options, which was limited to Sam Houston State. Nowhere did I ever call him a "stud" or anything in that zipcode.
If you are going to get a shot in on me, how about either getting it right, or staying on the topic at hand?
OMG...I remember countless threads where you said you were on the field and talked about his arm strength. You also took shots at Tyler Donovan. Come now BeerGal, I bet there are numerous posters that can vouch for the comments about how great Evridge was.
BeerGuy wants to sell you on a few things that only a fool would buy:
The 2007 offensive line was suspect he tells you, yet doesn't try to reconcile the FACT that the Packers had the 2nd best passing offense in the league last year. How'd that happen? What did you say?
"Ted's choice, and my choice to call him on it."
Yeah, go ahead and call out the guy who assembled the team with the 2nd best passing offense.
Or, maybe, TRY AGAIN.
*
Another one is this belief that the Packers defense was marginal last year. They were tied for 13th in sacks. They would have been eighth in sacks if they'd gotten a whole two more sacks.
Corey Williams, through 13 games with the Browns, has 0.5 sacks. Harrell may beat him yet.
Corey Williams was not worth the money he was asking, plain and simple. Even if you decide to pay him, you've already invested a ton in Pickett and Harrell. What are going to do keep a first round guy, Harrell, earning big bucks, on the bench? Especially when HE WAS DRAFTED TO BE THE STARTER. Financial decisions with personnel pay a huge role in who is with the team and who isn't.
*
Which brings up the question, How many players should TT have on call in case his starters get injured?
Up to the start of this season, Cullen Jenkins had played in 62 of 64 possible games. Where are the reasons to sink tons of money into his backup? KGB certainly would be fine for a spell, and then you have the rookie as the 3rd. Why would anyone look at that information before the season and say to himself, "You know, that really looks like a trouble spot." No one would.
The 2007 offensive line was suspect he tells you, yet doesn't try to reconcile the FACT that the Packers had the 2nd best passing offense in the league last year. How'd that happen? What did you say?
"Ted's choice, and my choice to call him on it."
Yeah, go ahead and call out the guy who assembled the team with the 2nd best passing offense.
Or, maybe, TRY AGAIN.
*
Another one is this belief that the Packers defense was marginal last year. They were tied for 13th in sacks. They would have been eighth in sacks if they'd gotten a whole two more sacks.
Corey Williams, through 13 games with the Browns, has 0.5 sacks. Harrell may beat him yet.
Corey Williams was not worth the money he was asking, plain and simple. Even if you decide to pay him, you've already invested a ton in Pickett and Harrell. What are going to do keep a first round guy, Harrell, earning big bucks, on the bench? Especially when HE WAS DRAFTED TO BE THE STARTER. Financial decisions with personnel pay a huge role in who is with the team and who isn't.
*
Which brings up the question, How many players should TT have on call in case his starters get injured?
Up to the start of this season, Cullen Jenkins had played in 62 of 64 possible games. Where are the reasons to sink tons of money into his backup? KGB certainly would be fine for a spell, and then you have the rookie as the 3rd. Why would anyone look at that information before the season and say to himself, "You know, that really looks like a trouble spot." No one would.
who just give up. BG knows he's wrong. He was wrong in the Badger forum and never showed up this year for his crow.
quote:Originally posted by The Artist fka TD:
OMG...I remember countless threads where you said you were on the field and talked about his arm strength. You also took shots at Tyler Donovan. Come now BeerGal, I bet there are numerous posters that can vouch for the comments about how great Evridge was.
Countless threads? Prove it. I barely ever even post in there. There was ONE thread where I defended that he had options coming into Wisconsin, and was at a minimum a decent transfer. I thought he was a good option at QB for numerous reasons. Allan never performed on the field.
And he did and still has the stronger arm to Donovan. He just never figured out how to keep the ball down, or threw it into the dirt.
I suppose I could go "Packer fan" on this and note that he had a hamstring and groin problem he was playing through when benched. But that isn't my style. He turned out to be a worthless Big Ten QB.
It didn't erase what I argued at the time. That he had transfer options from numerous division 1 programs, and had shown what he did in practices.
Never did I ever call him a "stud" and if you can't prove that I did, don't try and bring that up here.
I've never even remembered a damn thing you've posted it's all been so forgettable.
quote:Originally posted by who:
BeerGuy wants to sell you on a few things that only a fool would buy:
The 2007 offensive line was suspect he tells you, yet doesn't try to reconcile the FACT that the Packers had the 2nd best passing offense in the league last year. How'd that happen?
OK stats guy. So now that they aren't in the top ten, and are 13th in sacks allowed, how is that?
quote:Another one is this belief that the Packers defense was marginal last year. They were tied for 13th in sacks. They would have been eighth in sacks if they'd gotten a whole two more sacks.
Corey Williams, through 13 games with the Browns, has 0.5 sacks. Harrell may beat him yet.
Corey Williams was not worth the money he was asking, plain and simple. Even if you decide to pay him, you've already invested a ton in Pickett and Harrell. What are going to do keep a first round guy, Harrell, earning big bucks, on the bench? Especially when HE WAS DRAFTED TO BE THE STARTER. Financial decisions with personnel pay a huge role in who is with the team and who isn't.
Thanks for making my point for me. Gone from that team that was 13th in sacks are two key players - one by trade and not replaced, and one who was old and broken down. Williams' play in Cleveland has nothing to do with it. They are a 3-4 team - entirely different than what he was asked to do in Green Bay by playing what he did and when he did. Cleveland overpaid for him. And Green Bay didn't replace him.
quote:Which brings up the question, How many players should TT have on call in case his starters get injured?
Up to the start of this season, Cullen Jenkins had played in 62 of 64 possible games. Where are the reasons to sink tons of money into his backup? KGB certainly would be fine for a spell, and then you have the rookie as the 3rd. Why would anyone look at that information before the season and say to himself, "You know, that really looks like a trouble spot." No one would.
Two areas of weakness exposed by the Giants were the OL and DL (i.e., the team that cost the Pack a shot at the big one, and is the current top dog). Is it too much to ask him not to trade away without replacing one of the key cogs of the DL and counting on two injured players in Harrell and KGB? Is it too much to ask for him to address the interior of the Packers line that has been substandard since he arrived?
Injuries will happen and key ones will derail you. Losing Jenkins shouldn't have cost the season, which is what I am saying.
Who, I believe I noticed you calling on Thompson to make some moves in UFA this year. Am I correct? If he doesn't, will you question St. Ted?
Let's just put it this way. I think Ted's inactivity was a bad move a year ahead of you. If he sits around and doesn't adjust this roster to be a winner, will you start to question him? Just curious.
BeerGuy, I just don't think you are paying any attention to the financial aspect of player acquisition. You just want to get rid of people regardless of how much they're costing the team, and hire another person, while continuing to pay that first guy. That first guy, in one instance, is Harrell, who is just now getting a chance to play, due to injury. I'm not interested in talking about whether TT should have or should not have picked Harrell--what good does that do? The point should be, He's on the team. What do we do with him now? We've paid him a starter's wage. We drafted him No. 1, to obviously be the starting defensive tackle. Do we wait one more year to see what he has, or do we get rid of him and be on the hook for his starter's wage for another 3 years? You have got to factor in the financial aspect.
Brett Favre throwing an interception in overtime against the Giants was a key reason why we lost that game. Al Harris getting abused by Plaxico Burress was another reason. Remember, too, that we beat that same Giants team in the regular season going away.
What was substandard about the interior of the defensive line last year? I just don't understand what you're talking about. It was the strength of our defense. There were plenty of articles written about it. In fact, the breakdown, due to INJURY!!!, of that unit late in the season last year caused the lack of depth that proved part of our undoing. We have Kampman, Pickett, and Cullen Jenkins back. We have Johnny Jolly, Colin Cole, KGB, Mike Montgomery, Harrell, etc. Thompson picked Harrell to be the starting defensive lineman. You have two vets in front of him, who played pretty well last year. You can't stack and pay for three starting caliber defensive tackles. There is going to be a fall off. When injuries happen, there's a fall off. Less talented players appear. Rookies appear. A team that won games by a touchdown last year with a very healthy team lose the following year by a fieldgoal because a run went through where the weaker player was, etc. This is not rocket science. I don't see injuries as excuses, but simply factors in why we're losing. They are factors. There's no point arguing about it. It has nothing to do with how macho you are or are not. It has to do with how much talent your backup has. You could have the most macho, hardnosed guy as a backup, but if the guy has no talent, who cares how macho he is?
TT has rolled the dice many times with the team, and he's come out ahead most of the time. He's had some bad luck this year, there's no getting around it. I will admit that he made a mistake on the punter--that was dumb. The defensive tackle position, though, I think is just a case of people who are underperforming--Cole and Jolly--and Harrell either being injured through six games, or just not ready to start. He may prove never ready to be a starter. I don't know. I just think you have to give him a shot. That's what he's being paid to do. There's no way to have foreseen the Jenkins-KGB thing, so that's not on him. He did draft Thompson in the 4th round last year.
Since I wrote that bit about Haynesworth and Peppers, it's occurred to me, belatedly, that bringing in one of the two basically means that you're going to get rid of Jenkins or Harrell. I think Harrell better show some stuff in the next three games to make a difference.
You seem to relish criticizing TT for some reason. I don't know where that desire comes from, but whatever. I fully expect TT to do something at the defensive tackle position and get a pass rusher. This team has a very strong base of talent. Really strong. They just need one or two blue chips. Like a Haynesworth or a Peppers.
Brett Favre throwing an interception in overtime against the Giants was a key reason why we lost that game. Al Harris getting abused by Plaxico Burress was another reason. Remember, too, that we beat that same Giants team in the regular season going away.
What was substandard about the interior of the defensive line last year? I just don't understand what you're talking about. It was the strength of our defense. There were plenty of articles written about it. In fact, the breakdown, due to INJURY!!!, of that unit late in the season last year caused the lack of depth that proved part of our undoing. We have Kampman, Pickett, and Cullen Jenkins back. We have Johnny Jolly, Colin Cole, KGB, Mike Montgomery, Harrell, etc. Thompson picked Harrell to be the starting defensive lineman. You have two vets in front of him, who played pretty well last year. You can't stack and pay for three starting caliber defensive tackles. There is going to be a fall off. When injuries happen, there's a fall off. Less talented players appear. Rookies appear. A team that won games by a touchdown last year with a very healthy team lose the following year by a fieldgoal because a run went through where the weaker player was, etc. This is not rocket science. I don't see injuries as excuses, but simply factors in why we're losing. They are factors. There's no point arguing about it. It has nothing to do with how macho you are or are not. It has to do with how much talent your backup has. You could have the most macho, hardnosed guy as a backup, but if the guy has no talent, who cares how macho he is?
TT has rolled the dice many times with the team, and he's come out ahead most of the time. He's had some bad luck this year, there's no getting around it. I will admit that he made a mistake on the punter--that was dumb. The defensive tackle position, though, I think is just a case of people who are underperforming--Cole and Jolly--and Harrell either being injured through six games, or just not ready to start. He may prove never ready to be a starter. I don't know. I just think you have to give him a shot. That's what he's being paid to do. There's no way to have foreseen the Jenkins-KGB thing, so that's not on him. He did draft Thompson in the 4th round last year.
Since I wrote that bit about Haynesworth and Peppers, it's occurred to me, belatedly, that bringing in one of the two basically means that you're going to get rid of Jenkins or Harrell. I think Harrell better show some stuff in the next three games to make a difference.
You seem to relish criticizing TT for some reason. I don't know where that desire comes from, but whatever. I fully expect TT to do something at the defensive tackle position and get a pass rusher. This team has a very strong base of talent. Really strong. They just need one or two blue chips. Like a Haynesworth or a Peppers.
quote:Originally posted by who:
You seem to relish criticizing TT for some reason. I don't know where that desire comes from, but whatever. I fully expect TT to do something at the defensive tackle position and get a pass rusher.
Not so. Just not a pollyanna going along with the crowd on the GM love. Ted has done plenty of good things around here. But his inactivity in free agency has caught up to him this season. Let's just say, I'm one year ahead of you in thinking he should address the DL. As I said and have said several times in the thread, I don't think counting on KGB and Harrell was a good idea. It blew up in his face, as you agree with me (since you agree they need some DL work). I'm just calling him on it.
quote:This team has a very strong base of talent. Really strong.
I strongly disagree. The holes on both lines are pretty serious.
quote:They just need one or two blue chips. Like a Haynesworth or a Peppers.
Will you be disappointed if they don't step up to the plate should an opportunity present itself? I know I will.
BeerGuy, here are the key stats:
Points scored per game
27.2 (2007) (Offense) (4th best in league)
27.3 (2008) (Offense) (4th best in league)
Total offense--they are 10th in the league this year.
*
The big difference this year is Defense.
Points allowed:
18.2 (2007) (Defense) (6th best in league)
24.5 (2008) (Defense) (22nd best in league)
*
The problem is not the offense. Fix the defense with a couple of players, and you'll see it look like last year pretty quickly.
Points scored per game
27.2 (2007) (Offense) (4th best in league)
27.3 (2008) (Offense) (4th best in league)
Total offense--they are 10th in the league this year.
*
The big difference this year is Defense.
Points allowed:
18.2 (2007) (Defense) (6th best in league)
24.5 (2008) (Defense) (22nd best in league)
*
The problem is not the offense. Fix the defense with a couple of players, and you'll see it look like last year pretty quickly.
quote:Originally posted by BeerGuy:
OK stats guy. So now that they aren't in the top ten, and are 13th in sacks allowed, how is that?
Because of injuries to the Oline...nagging injuries to Clifton, Tauscher, and Wells. The other 2 have given up sacks certainly and injuries aren't the entire reason but to go from 19 sacks allowed in 16 games in '07 to 27 sacks allowed in 13 games emans there is something that changed with the line. The change you ask? Injuries!
quote:Thanks for making my point for me. Gone from that team that was 13th in sacks are two key players - one by trade and not replaced, and one who was old and broken down. Williams' play in Cleveland has nothing to do with it. They are a 3-4 team - entirely different than what he was asked to do in Green Bay by playing what he did and when he did. Cleveland overpaid for him. And Green Bay didn't replace him.
Everything goes back to Jenkins going down and KGB being hurt. They were our 2nd and 3rd best pass rushers... Even if we had Corey Williams, he would have been neutralized because no one fears Mike Montgomery/Jason Hunter. This is why it seems like we can't get any pass rush, Monty is an easy 1 on 1 which means you can focus on stopping Kampman and Jolly. It all goes back to Jenkins... you say that shouldn't ruin the season, but in reality, it did.
Then you say it's all Thompson's fault because he didn't replace Jenkins/KGB well enough. You use the Giants as an example... well that's an oddity in the NFL. No team is 4 deep in Pro Bowl DE's. No one plans on their 2nd and 3rd DE's being lost for the season. The reason the Giants had that is because they had been drafting Strahan's replacement for years and they hit on Umenyiora, Tuck, and Kiuwanuka. Again, that's the exception, not the rule.
quote:Two areas of weakness exposed by the Giants were the OL and DL (i.e., the team that cost the Pack a shot at the big one, and is the current top dog). Is it too much to ask him not to trade away without replacing one of the key cogs of the DL and counting on two injured players in Harrell and KGB? Is it too much to ask for him to address the interior of the Packers line that has been substandard since he arrived?
What was he supposed to do, pay Corey Williams the 10 mil franchise or give him 20 mil guaranteed? That's stupid and it IS too much to as for him to not trade Williams.
And the Packers Oline had given up 19 sacks, why would have changed it? What he was counting was our Oline coach actually helping to improve our guys. That was his only error.
quote:Originally posted by BeerGuy:quote:Originally posted by who:
You seem to relish criticizing TT for some reason. I don't know where that desire comes from, but whatever. I fully expect TT to do something at the defensive tackle position and get a pass rusher.
Not so. Just not a pollyanna going along with the crowd on the GM love. Ted has done plenty of good things around here. But his inactivity in free agency has caught up to him this season. Let's just say, I'm one year ahead of you in thinking he should address the DL. As I said and have said several times in the thread, I don't think counting on KGB and Harrell was a good idea. It blew up in his face, as you agree with me (since you agree they need some DL work). I'm just calling him on it.quote:This team has a very strong base of talent. Really strong.
I strongly disagree. The holes on both lines are pretty serious.quote:They just need one or two blue chips. Like a Haynesworth or a Peppers.
Will you be disappointed if they don't step up to the plate should an opportunity present itself? I know I will.
I know you keep saying that counting on Harrell wasn't a good idea, but you only know that now. Harrell was drafted to be the starting defensive tackle. Like most first rounders they are expected to play. Thompson was expecting that to happen. You cannot go out and just buy another starting defensive tackle and not let your first round pick be the guy. Yes, I agree, it blew up in his face SO FAR. But who wouldn't do what he did? You'd be an idiot to continue to pay Harrell first round money and have him sit on the bench because he was injured his first year. He was looking fairly solid at the end of the year. With Jolly and Harrell and Cole, that hardly seemed like a troublesome area. He has become that. I think Harrell gets one more year to prove himself.
Now I have a question for you, BeerGuy. If we bring in a staring dt/de, who do you put on the bench? Jenkins? Do you keep Harrell on the bench and spend starter money on another defensive tackle?
For the record, it would've cost a bit over $6 million to keep Williams as a franchise player. I thought then, and still do now, that TT made the right decision on Williams.
But I do agree that TT should've done more to ensure that this team would be able to get pressure up the middle. I'm not an expert, but I didn't see a legitimate option other than Jenkins when training camp started. In fact, I cringed when I went to practice in August and saw Hunter and Montgomery getting snaps on the inside.
But I do agree that TT should've done more to ensure that this team would be able to get pressure up the middle. I'm not an expert, but I didn't see a legitimate option other than Jenkins when training camp started. In fact, I cringed when I went to practice in August and saw Hunter and Montgomery getting snaps on the inside.
quote:Originally posted by who:
Now I have a question for you, BeerGuy. If we bring in a staring dt/de, who do you put on the bench? Jenkins? Do you keep Harrell on the bench and spend starter money on another defensive tackle?
No he comes from the "just throw money at it to make the problem go away" school of GM'ing. He'll pay superstar money to as many players as it takes to make us win. Doesn't think about the future or what that does to a team, just pay everyone and we'll win. Even if that means pay star money to a benchwarmer, as long as the money gets spent.
quote:Originally posted by who:
Harrell was drafted to be the starting defensive tackle. Like most first rounders they are expected to play. Thompson was expecting that to happen.
This is by all means a fair point. However, the guy has been an injury bug. Trading the depth away, to me, was a mistake. I liked the Williams trade. But they didn't back it up. Cole is just a guy. He was just a guy last season. Jolly showed a little bit of promise. Green Bay traded away from a strength, and got nothing this season to show for it. It was a mistake.
quote:You'd be an idiot to continue to pay Harrell first round money and have him sit on the bench because he was injured his first year.
Nobody would think that if you are winning. Use the cap money to create better depth! Harrell would be an expensive backup, but so be it.
quote:Now I have a question for you, BeerGuy. If we bring in a staring dt/de, who do you put on the bench? Jenkins? Do you keep Harrell on the bench and spend starter money on another defensive tackle?
First of all, they need a top notch lineman. Kampman is a good football player. I love the guy. But he is not an elite player on the DL. When things have been thin, he's been neutralized. Now, the number of top notch DLs are not a huge number - guys like Strahan, Jared Allen, etc. But I'd sit either Jenkins or Jolly based on if it's a DE or DT. If you get a top notch DE, you let Jenkins compete with Jolly for the DT. If you get a DT, you sit Jolly. You play 6 to 7 DLs per game anyway.
quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:quote:Originally posted by who:
Now I have a question for you, BeerGuy. If we bring in a staring dt/de, who do you put on the bench? Jenkins? Do you keep Harrell on the bench and spend starter money on another defensive tackle?
No he comes from the "just throw money at it to make the problem go away" school of GM'ing. He'll pay superstar money to as many players as it takes to make us win. Doesn't think about the future or what that does to a team, just pay everyone and we'll win. Even if that means pay star money to a benchwarmer, as long as the money gets spent.
I can speak for myself.
I'm in the winning plan. And if you aren't winning, you ask why. Injuries are a factor. But you let them be the excuse. I don't. We're different.
quote:Originally posted by heyward:
But I do agree that TT should've done more to ensure that this team would be able to get pressure up the middle. I'm not an expert, but I didn't see a legitimate option other than Jenkins when training camp started. In fact, I cringed when I went to practice in August and saw Hunter and Montgomery getting snaps on the inside.
But if you look at it, had Jenkins and KGB not gotten hurt, we could have slid Jenkins inside on 3rd downs, like we did last year. That was a perfectly good set up. But it didn't work out, KGB doesn't respond to his treatment like they thought he would and Jenkins gets hurt. Unfortunate, but Thompson did have a plan to address this issue.
quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:
Because of injuries to the Oline...nagging injuries to Clifton, Tauscher, and Wells. The other 2 have given up sacks certainly and injuries aren't the entire reason but to go from 19 sacks allowed in 16 games in '07 to 27 sacks allowed in 13 games emans there is something that changed with the line. The change you ask? Injuries!
Clifton and Tauscher have made it a career of playing through injuries. Why now is it an excuse?
Kampman is not elite? What categorizes elite players?
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=3684
Good grief....
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=3684
Good grief....
quote:Originally posted by BeerGuy:
I'm in the winning plan. And if you aren't winning, you ask why. Injuries are a factor. But you let them be the excuse. I don't. We're different.
No you're in the "If the Packers win I don't say anything but if they lose I dump on Ted Thompson" Plan.
quote:Originally posted by The Artist fka TD:
Kampman is not elite? What categorizes elite players?
It matters on what you define as elite. To me, elite is a guy that can't be stopped even if he doesn't have talent around him. Reggie White, Michael Strahan, etc. I don't think Kampman can carry a DL like those elite players. Is he a Pro Bowl/Damn Good/DE. Yeah. But he needs help. That's what the Packers need. Splitting hairs is wasting yours and my time.
quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:
But if you look at it, had Jenkins and KGB not gotten hurt, we could have slid Jenkins inside on 3rd downs, like we did last year. That was a perfectly good set up. But it didn't work out, KGB doesn't respond to his treatment like they thought he would and Jenkins gets hurt. Unfortunate, but Thompson did have a plan to address this issue.
They still didn't have a partner for Jenkins inside.
And don't underestimate how good of a pass rusher Williams was last season. He was terrific before Jolly got hurt and he had to play increased snaps down the stretch.
quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:
No you're in the "If the Packers win I don't say anything but if they lose I dump on Ted Thompson" Plan.
You and I can go back and forth all day if you want. If this isn't a place to critique the General Manager of the Green Bay Packers, then I apologize. As I've said, there are PLENTY of good things Ted Thompson has done. I'm pointing out where he needs to do better. I've given him plenty of credit for what he's done right. And I have never suggested that he needs to be fired, etc. I just don't give out passes as freely has you do.