Skip to main content

Originally Posted by Trophies:
Nevermind. Heaven forbid someone poses a thought outside the norm around here. Carry on.

Dude, it's not that it's "outside the norm".  It's that it's a knee jerk response from armchair fans that you'd find on Yahoo comments.  

 

First off, it's highly unlikely that Joe Thomas fixes the fact that our Defense gives up roughly 17, 468 yards per game to any QB not named Cutler.  Joe Thomas doesn't fix the fact that our center and the entire left side of the line has sucked donkey balls.  Joe Thomas is 30, and makes 11.5M a year.  Joe Thomas doesn't fix that fact that DickRod is slower than everyone in the NFL.  

 

Secondly, AR has succeeded with a less than elite LT for the past 7 years.  They have hit a rough patch sure, and I think it's FAR more to do with WRs not getting open and a piss poor gameplan.  

 

Finally - no one traded for him.  What does this tell you?  A Failure by TT, or he wasn't really available at anything close to a price anyone was willing to pay?  

 

You are a bright guy, and have posted a ton of great stuff, but saying trade 3 1st rounders for a 30 year old OL is silly reaction to 2 straight losses vs good defenses.   

 

Trading what would be required, plus the salary cap implications, plus the fact that no one else traded for him should tell you everything.   I do think TT is open for questioning on things.  Saying trade a 5th or 6th rounder for Vernon Davis we can debate, hell, I'd agree with those on this one that I think TT could have upgraded this area, but this 3 1st rounders for a LT is lunacy.  Sorry, but it is.  

Why people get all worked up that he hasn't yet and never will change from his plan is beyond stupid. Thompson said this a few years ago in regards to FA and trades...

 

 β€œThere’s no reluctance on our part. We do try to make certain that what we do is not just fantasy football. We’re investing in a player that’s got to come in and play a particular role. If we don’t think that player can perform to that contract, then it doesn’t make sense for us to do it just to say, β€˜Look what we’ve spent.’”

Originally Posted by CAPackFan95:
Originally Posted by Trophies:
Nevermind. Heaven forbid someone poses a thought outside the norm around here. Carry on.

Dude, it's not that it's "outside the norm".  It's that it's a knee jerk response from armchair fans that you'd find on Yahoo comments.  

 

First off, it's highly unlikely that Joe Thomas fixes the fact that our Defense gives up roughly 17, 468 yards per game to any QB not named Cutler.  Joe Thomas doesn't fix the fact that our center and the entire left side of the line has sucked donkey balls.  Joe Thomas is 30, and makes 11.5M a year.  Joe Thomas doesn't fix that fact that DickRod is slower than everyone in the NFL.  

 

Secondly, AR has succeeded with a less than elite LT for the past 7 years.  They have hit a rough patch sure, and I think it's FAR more to do with WRs not getting open and a piss poor gameplan.  

 

Finally - no one traded for him.  What does this tell you?  A Failure by TT, or he wasn't really available at anything close to a price anyone was willing to pay?  

 

You are a bright guy, and have posted a ton of great stuff, but saying trade 3 1st rounders for a 30 year old OL is silly reaction to 2 straight losses vs good defenses.   

 

Trading what would be required, plus the salary cap implications, plus the fact that no one else traded for him should tell you everything.   I do think TT is open for questioning on things.  Saying trade a 5th or 6th rounder for Vernon Davis we can debate, hell, I'd agree with those on this one that I think TT could have upgraded this area, but this 3 1st rounders for a LT is lunacy.  Sorry, but it is.  

Not a knee jerk reaction to 2 straight losses at all. I made those comments prior to our first loss.

 

Just throwing it out there. Is Ted not gambling? Seems he is to me, by sticking with his philosophy so rigidly. That's all.

Originally Posted by Hungry5:

Yesterday:

Richard Rodgers - 5rec, 19yrds, 2TD

Vernon Davis - 0rec, 0yrds, 0TD

 

 

Not that anyone cares.  

 

 

 

But Vernon Davis had a target. Manning overthrew him down the sideline & the announcer thought it was Emmanuel Sanders.

 

See how good Vernon looks.... He's so fast they thought he was Sanders!

Last edited by Boris
Originally Posted by Trophies:
We sure could use Joe Thomas to take over for a struggling David Bakhtiari, who has been playing hurt all season, and our team has suffered as a result. Why was such a trade not pursued? It is just the kind of move that could carry the team over the top, at a nominal cost, given the proven abilities of the player.

Why do you make this a statement of fact?  Maybe TT called the Browns & they told him two #1s & he thought "Mmmm, Hadl-lite.  No thanks".  Or maybe he never called.  You don't know & I don't know.  But to damn him for stuff you don't know seems odd to me.

Originally Posted by Hungry5:

It's gambling when you are flipping a coin on the result. So no, I'd say Thompson is not a gambler, because he can't afford to be. Being a consistent winner requires managing to the cap. Which means little to no dead money on failed players. If you want a SFO, SEA, ATL, or any of the other one-hit wonders over the past few years go ahead and enjoy that fleeting success.

 

 

Which means they were in perfect position to roll the dice on a guy like Vernon Davis.

!. Relatively cheap, half-year salary.
2. No dead cap space.

3. Counts towards a compensatory pick when he signs elsewhere if they don't want him back so you still have a pick.

4. Potentially fills a glaring weakness.

 
Trading for VD fits the coin-flip scenario:

a - would he be motivated to play out his contract this year for a team he didn't want drafting him in the 1st place?

b - how would he fit in the locker room?

c - limit development of Rodgers after Q comes back?

 

 

On paper VD made sense to the fans, but this isn't fantasy football.

Last edited by H5
Originally Posted by Esox:

       

 

I would rather see the Packers not make it to the big game and whine about it, than to cheer on a bunch of low-lives.  But that's me. 

 


       
But isn't that whay McGinn's piece was about? The Packers can no longer claim moral high ground. They have made roster decisions that are equally as questionable regarding character, though certainly not the long term. It just comes down to fallacies that have espoused to explain why certain move (or non moves) have been made no longer hold water.

For instance- in another response in this thread, Marshawn Lynch was called a thug. He may not be popular for the crotch grab in the NFCC Game, but a thug?
http://m.bleacherreport.com/ar...man-behind-beastmode

That guy's a thug? I don't think so. And he was there for the taking. The Packers passed, and Lynch became the centerpiece of Seattle's rise to NFC dominance.

The point I'm making is not to decry something from 2009... It merely illustrates the point that Thompson complete aversion to deals to make the team better have hurt the team.

I have supported most of Thompson's moves, or lack of moves, and still think the team's been guided well in his tenure. And maybe he'll get the last laugh this season too. But it is ok to question and discuss it now. Not trading for Lynch was a mistake. We know that now. Many of his non-moves were not mistakes. Meanwhile, after the last 3 weeks we have legit reason for concern.
Originally Posted by Trophies:

Nevermind. Heaven forbid someone poses a thought outside the norm around here. Carry on.

It has nothing to do with outside the norm. This team is not 1 player away. This team is not playing well. Rodgers is not playing well. The Oline is not playing well. Lacy needs to be on the inactive list. The secondary is not playing well. All phases are not playing well. Joe Thomas will not fix it.

Originally Posted by Music City:
Originally Posted by Esox:

       

 

I would rather see the Packers not make it to the big game and whine about it, than to cheer on a bunch of low-lives.  But that's me. 

 


       
But isn't that whay McGinn's piece was about? The Packers can no longer claim moral high ground. They have made roster decisions that are equally as questionable regarding character, though certainly not the long term. It just comes down to fallacies that have espoused to explain why certain move (or non moves) have been made no longer hold water.

For instance- in another response in this thread, Marshawn Lynch was called a thug. He may not be popular for the crotch grab in the NFCC Game, but a thug?
http://m.bleacherreport.com/ar...man-behind-beastmode

That guy's a thug? I don't think so. And he was there for the taking. The Packers passed, and Lynch became the centerpiece of Seattle's rise to NFC dominance.

The point I'm making is not to decry something from 2009... It merely illustrates the point that Thompson complete aversion to deals to make the team better have hurt the team.

I have supported most of Thompson's moves, or lack of moves, and still think the team's been guided well in his tenure. And maybe he'll get the last laugh this season too. But it is ok to question and discuss it now. Not trading for Lynch was a mistake. We know that now. Many of his non-moves were not mistakes. Meanwhile, after the last 3 weeks we have legit reason for concern.

Nice post Music City!

 

Rodgers said, at the time, "Bring it on!"

 

Woodson said after the trade to SEA: "I thought with the way things shaked out with our team it would be a logical thing for us to do to get another big-time back like Marshawn Lynch. And it didn't pan out," Woodson said. "For players, there's nothing you can do but go out there and play football with the guys you've got."

 

Sometimes, a trade on that scale, being the magnitude of the player you are adding, can go a long way towards the overall morale of your team. Woodson was disappointed after Ted failed to pull the trigger as I'm sure other players were.

 

I believe the same holds true this season, missing on Joe Thomas. Yeah, we've got problems in other areas, but, don't some of you think a player added to the team like Thomas might have cranked it up a notch with other players? I do. It certainly would have helped our OL and our passing and run games. I think Aaron Rodgers would have loved a trade like that.

 

-------

 More from Rodgers:

"No. I mean I like our guys. I think we can win with them. Obviously, youd never turn down a talented player. I like our guys. I dont have any frustration."

He paused, and then added:

"Thats not my decision. Thats (the front offices) decision. So, I think I just realize you can have requests or wants or needs, and Im not saying Lynch was one of them because I never once said anything to the personnel department about Lynch. You guys asked me, and I said, 'Bring it on. You cant have enough players.' But thats not my place. I play, they make those decisions, coaches coach."

I also talked to linebacker Desmond Bishop, who also played with Lynch at the University of California and he said that Lynch told him after the trade that he would have been happy to come to Green Bay. Bishop said Lynch did not know how aggressively the Packers pursued him.

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

 

http://www.jsonline.com/...gs/sports/104445223.html

 

In order for Thompson to get Lynch, he would have had to best Seattle's offer of a fourth-round pick in 2011 and a conditional sixth-round pick (could be a fifth) in 2012. So, we probably could have had Marshawn Lynch for our R3 in 2011, who turned out to be Alex Green... throw in an R5 (Jeron McMillian) or an R6 (Terrell Manning) from 2012...

Last edited by Trophies

LOL what year is this?

 

Really people. This is TT's 11th year. It is what it is. He's not changing and with a rare occasional exception there is a reason 86% (or something like that) of this roster is home grown. He's number 1 in the league in this and the second team isn't even close to that.

 

He will not change no matter how many articles are written, blogs posted, players requesting they sign _____ or questions asked in a PC. It's unbelievable we're still talking seriously about Joe Thomas and Marshawn Lynch.

 

When Ted was in the 3rd grade he'd heard rumors another kid was putting a PBJ, red vines, and a can of orange fanta on the block just before lunch if anyone could get him a seat close to Jenny Lundergarde.

 

Ted thought it was can't miss. He made a call and then made the offer. 

 

The PBJ had crust. The fanta was flat. Jenny went onto become Brad Childress.  

 

We don't know for certain this didn't happen.  

 

 

Originally Posted by Trophies:

I believe the same holds true this season, missing on Joe Thomas. Yeah, we've got problems in other areas, but, don't some of you think a player added to the team like Thomas might have cranked it up a notch with other players? I do. It certainly would have helped our OL and our passing and run games. I think Aaron Rodgers would have loved a trade like that.

FFS. There's not one shred of evidence anybody on this team was pining after Joe Thomas. For crissakes we know your opinion, why are you generating all this crap to make it look like your view has substance?

 

image

Attachments

Images (1)
  • image
Last edited by ilcuqui
Originally Posted by Vernon Davis:

"It's a pleasure to be here," Davis told reporters at a news conference the next day at 49ers headquarters. "I've always wanted to come here. I was sitting at the table yesterday and Green Bay was up and I was telling my agent, 'I hope Green Bay doesn't take me. I definitely don't want to go there.'

 

Originally Posted by Trophies:
Originally Posted by Hungry5:
 
Originally Posted by Trophies:
Trading a 1st and a 2nd is a coin flip for Joe Thomas? A perennial All-Pro LT, to protect your MVP QB?

A 1 and 2 wasn't enough, so this scenario does not fit the discussion.

 

Multiple sources confirmed Tuesday afternoon, just after the deadline had passed without a deal, that the Browns had asked for as much as two first-round picks from the Broncos at one point and that early Tuesday afternoon, Mountain time, the two sides were closing in on a package that included Thomas and a Browns fourth-round pick in exchange for the Broncos' first- and second-round picks in the 2016 draft but that the Browns also wanted to include the Broncos' 2016 third-round pick.

 

Trading for VD fits the coin-flip scenario:

a - would he be motivated to play out his contract this year for a team he didn't want drafting him in the 1st place?

b - how would he fit in the locker room?

c - limit development of Rodgers after Q comes back?

 

 

Whatever. The compensation is debatable, but the importance of adding one of the best LTs in all of football is the main argument. I am firmly on record as having said I would have given up 3 1st round picks for the guy, and I believe it would have been well worth it. Someone else said the asking price was less than that.

 

As for Vernon Davis, it was an interesting article I posted from Forbes magazine. It wasn't my own premise.

Three firsts?  I'm happy you aren't the Packers GM.  

Originally Posted by Grave Digger:
"Not taking a risk on Greg Hardy has really backfired on Thompson. Uncle Ted needs to game on a Seth Joyner and an Andre Rison type player because they made the difference 20 years ago."
"This team is just so risk averse...not enough gambles on blowing 1st round picks, not enough INTs being thrown, etc. Murphy needs to bring in some World Series of Poker champions to explain to this organization what gambling means."

 

My friend. Are you capable of enganging in debate with anything other than strawman arguments?

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×