What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Packers next Head Coach.. (1 Viewer)

What in hell is Thompson doing?

His personnel moves have been terrible. He seems to be actively pushing Favre out the door, despite having tons of cap room and a top 5 pick in the draft. I think most Packer fans would like them to at least make an effort at one last run. Now he hires the one coach on his list with the most questionable qualifications.

When Ron Wolf hired Sherman, it was fair to give him the benefit of the doubt because it was Ron Wolf for cripes sake. He had a track record of success and he had the sack to immediately fix the one glaring mistake he made in hiring Ray Rhodes.

What has Thompson done to deserve the benefit of the doubt? Nothing. Hiring McCarthy looks like a crap move until proven otherwise. I could be proven wrong. I'm hoping it's a great move. But I see no reason whatsoever to like this move or anything else Thompson has done so far.
With the exception of hiring Mooch (who didn't appear to want to coach) this is the one coach who Favre may actually play for. He worked with Favre in 99 and runs a west coast offense so I'd say Favre is a little more likely to return with McCarthy than most other coaches.Sherman had to go. His teams got worse each season under his tenure and they just had too many games where they came out flat...at Detroit, at Baltimore, in GB vs Cleveland, etc... I just think it was time for a change. I admit I'm not fired up about this choice but who knows, lets wait and see.

 
Pipes words seem appropriateI would almost have to think that Thompson had to go to Brett and ask if McCarthy was a coach that Brett might play for.I also agree that if the Pack loses Bates and Brett, that I want Thompson head on a platter.

 
What a bad hire. The 9'ers offense was one of the worst in NFL history last year. Good luck all GB fans. :no:
Im sure it had nothing to do with starting a rookie QB...then having him hurt...oh and having no real weapons to work with in SF.Give it time...

 
Man alive, the 2005 season just got THAT MUCH better for Bears fans!!!!

This is flippin awesome!

Mike McCarthey in Green Bay.

Childress in Minnesota.

All we need now is Russ Grimm will get hired by Detroit!

Is it lost on these teams that former Defensive Coordinators are the Head Coaches leading the Colts, Patriots, Steelers, Bears and Panthers?!?!?!?
Do you think that is the only reason those teams are winning?Because it works for one team does not mean it works for others.

Former offensive coaches are coaching the Seahawks, Broncos...and on and on as well.

There is no one single mold to chose a head coach.

 
I'm not here to win any popularity contests.

Childress was a good hire (I was just chiding ViQueens fans).

This Green Bay Mike McCarthy hire borders on lunacy.
Well, I wouldn't quite go THAT far....but the hiring is awfully curious considering the fact that there would seem to be MANY better candidates for the Packers head coaching position still floating around out there. :unsure: So, as far as "idiots" in the NFC North are concerned, are we safe to say:

1 (tie). Ted Thompson, Packers GM

1 (tie). Matt Millen, Lions

Distant Third. :shrug:

.....now that Mike Tice is out of Minnesota?
Ummm...what?What has Thompson done to be put down there with Millen?

 
What in hell is Thompson doing?

His personnel moves have been terrible. He seems to be actively pushing Favre out the door, despite having tons of cap room and a top 5 pick in the draft. I think most Packer fans would like them to at least make an effort at one last run. Now he hires the one coach on his list with the most questionable qualifications.

When Ron Wolf hired Sherman, it was fair to give him the benefit of the doubt because it was Ron Wolf for cripes sake. He had a track record of success and he had the sack to immediately fix the one glaring mistake he made in hiring Ray Rhodes.

What has Thompson done to deserve the benefit of the doubt? Nothing. Hiring McCarthy looks like a crap move until proven otherwise. I could be proven wrong. I'm hoping it's a great move. But I see no reason whatsoever to like this move or anything else Thompson has done so far.
How is hiring a guy that runs a similar offense, and has a good relationship with Favre trying to push him out the door?Wolf had a big say in this hire as well...it was not all Thompson.

 
I'm not sure how to react just yet. You can't judge him on anything he did in San Francisco, good Lord they didn't have much of anything talentwise out there. But they did play hard and won a few ballgames.
Agreed, but Smith's development was putrid. He got progressively worse as the season went along. And it's not like McCarthy's Saints offenses were anything special given the talent level he had to work with. Those were always viewed as under-achieving offenses with major Red Zone issues (often due to a lack of commitment to the running game) and erratic QB play (again that's not all on McCarthy with Brooks but it's not like McCarthy was able to get Brooks to play at a consistently high level).It's obviously possible McCarthy could turn out to be a great hire. But on the surface, this is a very uninspiring hire of a candidate whose resume isn't exactly glittering and who wasn't viewed as being one of the top candidates available at the present time.
What a bad hire. The 9'ers offense was one of the worst in NFL history last year. Good luck all GB fans. :no:
:lmao: So you want to base the hire just on what he did last year?
Since I unfortunately had the pleasure of watching every single 9'er game last year, it is my opinion that the offense got worse as the year progressed. Smith looked completely lost by the end of the season. Does the disaster fall soley on the OC's shoulder, no. But he was part of the problem. Certainly not a performance worth a promotion. I believe he will suck in GB. We will see.
It remains to be seen whether McCarthy will be an effective leader, but anyone who says that Alex Smith got progressively worse each game didn't see the 49ers on a consistent basis or doesn't know how to evalute quarterbacks. On the contrary, he became progressively better. While his successes were modest, he did grow comfortable enough in the position to warrant optimism for 49er fans by the end of the season. The Niners did win their last two games, in case you have already forgotten. Regarding McCarthy, in some ways, it doesn't matter how good you were as an assistant coach once you have the keys. Just as we know there is a scrap heap of talented ACs who can't lead a team as a head coach, there are HCs in this league who are better at being the top dog, rather than drawing up X's and O's. Ditka was an obvious example. More recently, I'd say that Jim Mora is a better HC than he was an AC... If McCarthy can command the respect of his players, hire talented coordinators and clearly communicate an effective agenda, then he'll do okay. If Thompson can bring in talented players, he'll do even better.
I did watch the Niners and while I'm not an NFL evaluator of QBs by any stretch I was not impressed with Smith's development this season. I thought he got worse as the season went along even though the Niners did finish on a somewhat positive note. In his defense, he was a rookie in a very bad sitatuation so I'm not saying he's a bust or will never be any good. But I was not impressed with his progress as the season went along. But that's just one person's opinion.With regard to McCarthy, it's certainly possible -- as I said -- that this could turn out to be a great move by Thompson. On the surface, however, it smacks of the type of hire you make after all the other candidates you really want have either turned you down or been hired elsewhere. McCarthy does not possess a strong resume. The teams he has worked on most recently have either stunk (SF) or often horribly underachieved and been lackluster offensively (NO). Neither team enjoyed a strong history of success while he was there.

My preference if Thompson was going to go the coordinator route (which is what I hoped he would do) would be to hire someone who had a history of success in winning organizations under proven head coaches. That's precisely what Wolf did with Holmgren and to a lesser extent with Sherman. The last time the Packers hired a head coach who came from a losing organization previously was Rhodes. And we all know how that turned out.

Again, maybe Thompson knows something here that few others are going to see or what appears to be readily apparent with regard to McCarthy. But the best description that can be made about this hire is that it's a very suspect one given what we do know about McCarthy and given his coaching history.

 
What in hell is Thompson doing?

His personnel moves have been terrible. He seems to be actively pushing Favre out the door, despite having tons of cap room and a top 5 pick in the draft. I think most Packer fans would like them to at least make an effort at one last run. Now he hires the one coach on his list with the most questionable qualifications.

When Ron Wolf hired Sherman, it was fair to give him the benefit of the doubt because it was Ron Wolf for cripes sake. He had a track record of success and he had the sack to immediately fix the one glaring mistake he made in hiring Ray Rhodes.

What has Thompson done to deserve the benefit of the doubt? Nothing. Hiring McCarthy looks like a crap move until proven otherwise. I could be proven wrong. I'm hoping it's a great move. But I see no reason whatsoever to like this move or anything else Thompson has done so far.
How is hiring a guy that runs a similar offense, and has a good relationship with Favre trying to push him out the door?Wolf had a big say in this hire as well...it was not all Thompson.
This move isn't what makes me thinkg he's pushing Favre out the door. It's a general vibe I'm getting. -Didn't Favre say he wasn't sure they wanted him back?

-Thompson said Favre has one month to decide if he's returning.

-Favre's people leaking that he would return if Mooch were named coach. What, don't Favre and Thompson ever talk? That's odd isn't it?

 
I have trepidation over this move.Will this alienate Bates who has the defense really moving in the right direction?Will it alienate the defensive players who recently have felt sold out when made, along with Donatello, the scapegoats for the 2003 loss in Philly?Will this alienate Favre who I believe could still lead this team somewhere with the return of Walker, Murphy, Green and plenty of free agent money and a top pick in the draft for the first time in over a decade?All there is to do right now is hope. Obviously Thompson sits in a more informed position than I, so I hope he knows something. Reputation among fans, even knowledgable ones, often is no indicator of success. I guess I'd rather have this than some tired retread. Still, I'm nervous.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone remember a no-name Offensive guy named Andy Reid?

:confused:
Reid was on a highly successful team and part of a strong organization, an organization that had turned out several strong coaches prior to him being hired by the Eagles.
 
I have trepidation over this move.

Will this alienate Bates who has the defense really moving in the right direction?

Will it alienate the defensive players who recently have felt sold out when made, along with Donatello, the scapegoats for the 2003 loss in Philly?

Will this alienate Favre who I believe could still lead this team somewhere with the return of Walker, Murphy, Green and plenty of free agent money and a top pick in the draft for the first time in over a decade?

All there is to do right now is hope. Obviously Thompson sits in a more informed position than I, so I hope he knows something. Reputation among fans, even knowledgable ones, often is no indicator of success. I guess I'd rather have this than some tired retread. Still, I'm nervous.
I would not count on Murphy....he has a strange injury with no real time table for return.I agree on your last two lines about not wanting an old retread (Wade Phillips) and being nervous.

 
Anyone remember a no-name Offensive guy named Andy Reid?

:confused:
Reid was on a highly successful team and part of a strong organization, an organization that had turned out several strong coaches prior to him being hired by the Eagles.
McCarthy was on those same teams...in the same position as Reid.
 
What in hell is Thompson doing?

His personnel moves have been terrible.  He seems to be actively pushing Favre out the door, despite having tons of cap room and a top 5 pick in the draft.  I think most Packer fans would like them to at least make an effort at one last run.  Now he hires the one coach on his list with the most questionable qualifications. 

When Ron Wolf hired Sherman, it was fair to give him the benefit of the doubt because it was Ron Wolf for cripes sake.  He had a track record of success and he had the sack to immediately fix the one glaring mistake he made in hiring Ray Rhodes.

What has Thompson done to deserve the benefit of the doubt?  Nothing.  Hiring McCarthy looks like a crap move until proven otherwise.  I could be proven wrong.  I'm hoping it's a great move.  But I see no reason whatsoever to like this move or anything else Thompson has done so far.
How is hiring a guy that runs a similar offense, and has a good relationship with Favre trying to push him out the door?Wolf had a big say in this hire as well...it was not all Thompson.
This move isn't what makes me thinkg he's pushing Favre out the door. It's a general vibe I'm getting. -Didn't Favre say he wasn't sure they wanted him back?

-Thompson said Favre has one month to decide if he's returning.

-Favre's people leaking that he would return if Mooch were named coach. What, don't Favre and Thompson ever talk? That's odd isn't it?
You are reading too much into this. It would be career suicide in GB for Thompson if it was ever determined he didn't want Favre back.
 
Anyone remember a no-name Offensive guy named Andy Reid?

:confused:
When you have a GM with no track record of success hiring a coach who doesn't appear to be the most qualified on the list, people aren't going to give the benefit of the doubt.btw- Andy Reid came from the Packers during their pinnacle of their success. That's always a much easier sell than hiring a guy from a disaster of a team like the 49ers this year.

The best we can do is withhold judgment. I was hoping for better than that from our GM.

 
How can people be calling this an "awful hire" w/o really knowing much about him. Between N.O. and S.F. he certainly didn't have much to work with. People who know a lot more about what it takes to be an NFL coach are saying he has one of the best offensive minds in the game. Additionally, he fits the current system, and is liked by Favre. This suggests that the head office isn't pushing Favre out the door (which will make some happy, and others upset). SF, while a bottom tier team, never gave up this year, and played their hearts out. To me this is the most important intangible that a coach can offer a team and their fans.

 
Anyone remember a no-name Offensive guy named Andy Reid?

:confused:
When you have a GM with no track record of success hiring a coach who doesn't appear to be the most qualified on the list, people aren't going to give the benefit of the doubt.
This is Thompson's first hire as a GM. Do you know more than Thompson to judge the qualifications he was looking for? It is known he was looking for two key things...1. An offensive minded coach 2. Someone that was tougher/more emotional than Sherman. McCarthy does fit that.From JS Online...

"Very intense, very intelligent and enthusiastic," Henry said. "He has the ability to analyze situations and to figure out how to attack them. He kind of talks like a Pittsburgh (expletive) but he's a very, very bright guy. His written and sometimes spoken word belies his native intelligence."

At times, McCarthy will get in the face of players and admonish entire position groups.

"He's got a pretty good temper on him," Henry said. "He will fly off the handle on occasion. He's not afraid to get after the offense or, in this case, the team.

"He will get emotional because of the temper part of it. He's got a healthy emotion about him. I don't really know how he'll respond on the sideline as a head coach. As the offensive coordinator on the sideline, he was very calm and very matter of fact about choosing the next series of plays."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone remember a no-name Offensive guy named Andy Reid?

:confused:
Reid was on a highly successful team and part of a strong organization, an organization that had turned out several strong coaches prior to him being hired by the Eagles.
McCarthy was on those same teams...in the same position as Reid.
McCarthy was not part of the Holmgren staff. He was part of Rhodes' weak 8-8 team in 99. And he clearly hasn't been a part of a Super Bowl championship team or a legitimate Super Bowl-caliber organization in recent years.
 
Anyone remember a no-name Offensive guy named Andy Reid?

:confused:
Reid was on a highly successful team and part of a strong organization, an organization that had turned out several strong coaches prior to him being hired by the Eagles.
McCarthy was on those same teams...in the same position as Reid.
McCarthy was not part of the Holmgren staff. He was part of Rhodes' weak 8-8 team in 99. And he clearly hasn't been a part of a Super Bowl championship team or a legitimate Super Bowl-caliber organization in recent years.
Correct...thought he was there before 99 in another capacity...however, he only worked with this guy named Montana, and was a part of some good KC teams from 93 to 99
 
How can people be calling this an "awful hire" w/o really knowing much about him. Between N.O. and S.F. he certainly didn't have much to work with. People who know a lot more about what it takes to be an NFL coach are saying he has one of the best offensive minds in the game. Additionally, he fits the current system, and is liked by Favre. This suggests that the head office isn't pushing Favre out the door (which will make some happy, and others upset). SF, while a bottom tier team, never gave up this year, and played their hearts out. To me this is the most important intangible that a coach can offer a team and their fans.
:goodposting:
 
I see now on the blodger that Bates wants out. He says this has sucked the life out of him and that he now wants to persue opportunities he had ignored hoping for the Packer job.I hate to think of that improving young defense taking a step backward.

 
I see now on the blodger that Bates wants out. He says this has sucked the life out of him and that he now wants to persue opportunities he had ignored hoping for the Packer job.

I hate to think of that improving young defense taking a step backward.
THAT should be the bigger news.. Who knows how this hire will work out, but losing Bates will Kick the Defense in the butt.

From a :excited: Viking fan looking to improve our 3-0 record vs. The Pack in the last 3 games. :boxing: ;)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I see now on the blodger that Bates wants out. He says this has sucked the life out of him and that he now wants to persue opportunities he had ignored hoping for the Packer job.

I hate to think of that improving young defense taking a step backward.
Depends who they bring in.I do feel bad for Bates...but how many offers was he actually getting from anywhere else besides Green Bay (though he will now Im sure)...in addition, how many big offers was he getting while in Miami.

That and Green Bay will have to let him out of his contract or be compensated for any team bringing him in (depending on the wording of his contract..ie...if he has an out for taking a HC job).

 
I'm amazed at how quickly some jump to conclusions. Now the defense will take a step back if Bates leaves? Don't you think it's a beat early to make a comment like that? 1. We don't know who the DC will be or if Bates if gone.2. We don't know what players will be added through the draft.3. We don't know what players will be added through free agency.

 
I see now on the blodger that Bates wants out. He says this has sucked the life out of him and that he now wants to persue opportunities he had ignored hoping for the Packer job.

I hate to think of that improving young defense taking a step backward.
:pickle: :D :thumbup: :headbang: (As Vikings fan...)
 
I'm amazed at how quickly some jump to conclusions. Now the defense will take a step back if Bates leaves? Don't you think it's a beat early to make a comment like that?

1. We don't know who the DC will be or if Bates if gone.

2. We don't know what players will be added through the draft.

3. We don't know what players will be added through free agency.
I do think it is a bit early to make statements that it will. I meant to convey that it is possible. Often there is disruption for a year when a new staff arrives with a new system or new wrinkles. The strong possibility needs to be recognized.I am withholding judgment on everything right now. As I said I'm nervous, but who among us fans is in a position truely to know as much as Thompson? I would submit none. We can have opinions. We can read the tea leaves, but in the end we just have to wait, and the waiting is making me nervous.

 
Anyone remember a no-name Offensive guy named Andy Reid?

:confused:
Reid was on a highly successful team and part of a strong organization, an organization that had turned out several strong coaches prior to him being hired by the Eagles.
McCarthy was on those same teams...in the same position as Reid.
McCarthy was not part of the Holmgren staff. He was part of Rhodes' weak 8-8 team in 99. And he clearly hasn't been a part of a Super Bowl championship team or a legitimate Super Bowl-caliber organization in recent years.
Correct...thought he was there before 99 in another capacity...however, he only worked with this guy named Montana, and was a part of some good KC teams from 93 to 99
I think it's safe to say Montana was already a pretty decent QB by the time he got to KC. ;) The Bates news isn't surprising but is obviously a HUGE blow to the Packers. It really puts the pressure on McCarthy to find a good defensive coordinator because Bates' work with the defense was one of the few bright spots for the Packers this season.

 
I'm amazed at how quickly some jump to conclusions. Now the defense will take a step back if Bates leaves? Don't you think it's a beat early to make a comment like that?

1. We don't know who the DC will be or if Bates if gone.

2. We don't know what players will be added through the draft.

3. We don't know what players will be added through free agency.
I do think it is a bit early to make statements that it will. I meant to convey that it is possible. Often there is disruption for a year when a new staff arrives with a new system or new wrinkles. The strong possibility needs to be recognized.I am withholding judgment on everything right now. As I said I'm nervous, but who among us fans is in a position truely to know as much as Thompson? I would submit none. We can have opinions. We can read the tea leaves, but in the end we just have to wait, and the waiting is making me nervous.
Hard to be much of a disruption of a team that was 4-12.The positives about this "disruption" from a Packer standpoint.

McCarthy is a WCO guy...the offense will be tweaked...but still a similar style.

Now...with Bates possibly out...the defense will change some...but it will all depend on who they bring in.

My first push would be for Marinelli out of Tampa.

 
Anyone remember a no-name Offensive guy named Andy Reid?

:confused:
Reid was on a highly successful team and part of a strong organization, an organization that had turned out several strong coaches prior to him being hired by the Eagles.
McCarthy was on those same teams...in the same position as Reid.
McCarthy was not part of the Holmgren staff. He was part of Rhodes' weak 8-8 team in 99. And he clearly hasn't been a part of a Super Bowl championship team or a legitimate Super Bowl-caliber organization in recent years.
Correct...thought he was there before 99 in another capacity...however, he only worked with this guy named Montana, and was a part of some good KC teams from 93 to 99
I think it's safe to say Montana was already a pretty decent QB by the time he got to KC. ;) The Bates news isn't surprising but is obviously a HUGE blow to the Packers. It really puts the pressure on McCarthy to find a good defensive coordinator because Bates' work with the defense was one of the few bright spots for the Packers this season.
Montana yes...but look what Bono and Grbac did there as well.
 
I'm amazed at how quickly some jump to conclusions. Now the defense will take a step back if Bates leaves? Don't you think it's a beat early to make a comment like that?

1. We don't know who the DC will be or if Bates if gone.

2. We don't know what players will be added through the draft.

3. We don't know what players will be added through free agency.
You must be kidding. Wasn't he the #1 reason why their defense improved from 24th in 2004 to 7th in 2005? If not, what was? How can his leaving be a good thing?
 
What in hell is Thompson doing?

His personnel moves have been terrible.
You have to be kidding me. Terrible personnel moves? You mean like landing a starting safety in round 2? Or how about a pretty damn good RB off the street? Or maybe, a great special teams player and up and coming linebacker out of BYU late in the draft. Pure ignorance. Thompson's first rookie class made a lot of contributions in year one. They'll only get better, and I'm looking forward to draft 2.
 
The Miami defense didn't seem to suffer with Bates leaving. They improved in points allowed and turnovers in 2005. 22.1 points under Bates to 19.8 in 2005. Turnovers went from 25 under Bates to 31 in 2005.They allowed 317. 4 yards per game in 2004 vs 305.9 under Bates.

 
I'm amazed at how quickly some jump to conclusions. Now the defense will take a step back if Bates leaves? Don't you think it's a beat early to make a comment like that?

1. We don't know who the DC will be or if Bates if gone.

2. We don't know what players will be added through the draft.

3. We don't know what players will be added through free agency.
You must be kidding. Wasn't he the #1 reason why their defense improved from 24th in 2004 to 7th in 2005? If not, what was? How can his leaving be a good thing?
Yes...he was a big reason. As were the play of Barnett (some due to Bates's system) and the play of Al Harris dramatically improving. But the point is...nobody knows who the next DC will be...or how people will really react to it.

Too early to just say...Bates is gone, the defense will suck.

 
What in hell is Thompson doing?

His personnel moves have been terrible.
You have to be kidding me. Terrible personnel moves? You mean like landing a starting safety in round 2? Or how about a pretty damn good RB off the street? Or maybe, a great special teams player and up and coming linebacker out of BYU late in the draft. Pure ignorance. Thompson's first rookie class made a lot of contributions in year one. They'll only get better, and I'm looking forward to draft 2.
Id say his choices at guard were pretty awful.Id give him a solid C for this past season.

The positives you mention keep him from being lower...as does the fact that his hands were tied on Wahle and Rivera because of Sherman's idiocy as GM.

 
I'm amazed at how quickly some jump to conclusions. Now the defense will take a step back if Bates leaves? Don't you think it's a beat early to make a comment like that?

1. We don't know who the DC will be or if Bates if gone.

2. We don't know what players will be added through the draft.

3. We don't know what players will be added through free agency.
You must be kidding. Wasn't he the #1 reason why their defense improved from 24th in 2004 to 7th in 2005? If not, what was? How can his leaving be a good thing?
Yes...he was a big reason. As were the play of Barnett (some due to Bates's system) and the play of Al Harris dramatically improving. But the point is...nobody knows who the next DC will be...or how people will really react to it.

Too early to just say...Bates is gone, the defense will suck.
Fair enough. I do remember from last offseason that all the Packer fans were absolutely spot on about Bates being a big boon for the defense. That was a nice call that I was sceptical about at the time.
 
And to those who are ripping the offensive work in New Orleans, how'd they look without McCarthy this season? How many 1000 yard receivers did they have before McCarthey arrived? How about 1000 yard rushers? Might want to actually look at his impact, as it's pretty clear when you do.

 
I'm amazed at how quickly some jump to conclusions. Now the defense will take a step back if Bates leaves? Don't you think it's a beat early to make a comment like that?

1. We don't know who the DC will be or if Bates if gone.

2. We don't know what players will be added through the draft.

3. We don't know what players will be added through free agency.
You must be kidding. Wasn't he the #1 reason why their defense improved from 24th in 2004 to 7th in 2005? If not, what was? How can his leaving be a good thing?
Yes...he was a big reason. As were the play of Barnett (some due to Bates's system) and the play of Al Harris dramatically improving. But the point is...nobody knows who the next DC will be...or how people will really react to it.

Too early to just say...Bates is gone, the defense will suck.
Fair enough. I do remember from last offseason that all the Packer fans were absolutely spot on about Bates being a big boon for the defense. That was a nice call that I was sceptical about at the time.
Yeah...he was an exciting choice then...his system did work wonders.Hopefully they can convince him to stay...though I do not see it as he really is upset about things. If not...we need to find someone who can kick some butt...

I like what I read about Marinelli from Tampa...and now that Gunther is staying in KC, his name is back out there...though it may be tough to have a first time DC with a first time HC.

 
What in hell is Thompson doing?

His personnel moves have been terrible. 
You have to be kidding me. Terrible personnel moves? You mean like landing a starting safety in round 2? Or how about a pretty damn good RB off the street? Or maybe, a great special teams player and up and coming linebacker out of BYU late in the draft. Pure ignorance. Thompson's first rookie class made a lot of contributions in year one. They'll only get better, and I'm looking forward to draft 2.
Id say his choices at guard were pretty awful.Id give him a solid C for this past season.

The positives you mention keep him from being lower...as does the fact that his hands were tied on Wahle and Rivera because of Sherman's idiocy as GM.
What's up sho?Choice are guard weren't great. But how many guys contributed? I count Collins, Murphy (limited by injury,) Underwood, Poppinga, Montgomery, and Whitacker. Not to mention, there is serious buzz about 5th round pick Junius Coston, who Green Bay thinks will compete for a starting guard spot next season.

Now add in the additions of Gado, Herron and Gardner?

To me, that's more like B+. You can crucify him for the guards if you want, but no GM is going to hit on every player. I like his style so far.

 
I'm amazed at how quickly some jump to conclusions. Now the defense will take a step back if Bates leaves? Don't you think it's a beat early to make a comment like that?

1. We don't know who the DC will be or if Bates if gone.

2. We don't know what players will be added through the draft.

3. We don't know what players will be added through free agency.
You must be kidding. Wasn't he the #1 reason why their defense improved from 24th in 2004 to 7th in 2005? If not, what was? How can his leaving be a good thing?
Huh? I didn't state his leaving was a good thing. I at least have the commen sense to not jump to a conclusion and I'm willing to wait to see how this plays out.
 
What in hell is Thompson doing?

His personnel moves have been terrible.
You have to be kidding me. Terrible personnel moves? You mean like landing a starting safety in round 2? Or how about a pretty damn good RB off the street? Or maybe, a great special teams player and up and coming linebacker out of BYU late in the draft. Pure ignorance. Thompson's first rookie class made a lot of contributions in year one. They'll only get better, and I'm looking forward to draft 2.
Id say his choices at guard were pretty awful.Id give him a solid C for this past season.

The positives you mention keep him from being lower...as does the fact that his hands were tied on Wahle and Rivera because of Sherman's idiocy as GM.
What's up sho?Choice are guard weren't great. But how many guys contributed? I count Collins, Murphy (limited by injury,) Underwood, Poppinga, Montgomery, and Whitacker. Not to mention, there is serious buzz about 5th round pick Junius Coston, who Green Bay thinks will compete for a starting guard spot next season.

Now add in the additions of Gado, Herron and Gardner?

To me, that's more like B+. You can crucify him for the guards if you want, but no GM is going to hit on every player. I like his style so far.
Collins and Murphy (pre-injury), Underwood did very little...Poppinga did not impress me all that much but may be a good one, Montgomery I like, but Whitticker? Sure he was a rookie...but the guy did not play all that well.I do like the late additions of Gado, Herron, and Gardner.

I cannot move him up to a B because of how bad the guards were...and how much they missed on how badly Flanagan was hurt. In retrospect, it might have been best to let him go, fill in with Wells at Center, and do their best to keep Wahle.

But the guards were such a big bust I cannot get him above a C. Klemm just did not fit into the system and was not all that good...at least he stayed healthy. O'Dwyer was cut.

 
I'm amazed at how quickly some jump to conclusions. Now the defense will take a step back if Bates leaves? Don't you think it's a beat early to make a comment like that?

1. We don't know who the DC will be or if Bates if gone.

2. We don't know what players will be added through the draft.

3. We don't know what players will be added through free agency.
You must be kidding. Wasn't he the #1 reason why their defense improved from 24th in 2004 to 7th in 2005? If not, what was? How can his leaving be a good thing?
Huh? I didn't state his leaving was a good thing. I at least have the commen sense to not jump to a conclusion and I'm willing to wait to see how this plays out.
Maybe I am reading your post wrong, but you appear to state that the defense will not "take a step back if Bates leaves." I disagree. I think it is a step back.Sure, if they do enough other things right, they can make up for this, but this can't be seen as a step in the right direction.

 
What in hell is Thompson doing?

His personnel moves have been terrible.
You have to be kidding me. Terrible personnel moves? You mean like landing a starting safety in round 2? Or how about a pretty damn good RB off the street? Or maybe, a great special teams player and up and coming linebacker out of BYU late in the draft. Pure ignorance. Thompson's first rookie class made a lot of contributions in year one. They'll only get better, and I'm looking forward to draft 2.
You got me there. Gado, Collins and a special teamer. Thompson should have been GM of the year.
 
Uh huh.Those expecting a miracle one year turnaround based on Green Bay's cap space, talent level, and draft position were sadly mistaken. By the way, look up for a list of guys who contributed on Thompson's watch. For rookies to make the contributions they did in year one was big. Not too mention his off the street guys also include Herron and Gardner.

 
I'm amazed at how quickly some jump to conclusions. Now the defense will take a step back if Bates leaves? Don't you think it's a beat early to make a comment like that?

1. We don't know who the DC will be or if Bates if gone.

2. We don't know what players will be added through the draft.

3. We don't know what players will be added through free agency.
You must be kidding. Wasn't he the #1 reason why their defense improved from 24th in 2004 to 7th in 2005? If not, what was? How can his leaving be a good thing?
Huh? I didn't state his leaving was a good thing. I at least have the commen sense to not jump to a conclusion and I'm willing to wait to see how this plays out.
Maybe I am reading your post wrong, but you appear to state that the defense will not "take a step back if Bates leaves." I disagree. I think it is a step back.Sure, if they do enough other things right, they can make up for this, but this can't be seen as a step in the right direction.
It is too early to determine how the defense will perform in 2006. I'm not ignorant to state they will not be as good just because Bates may leave. If Bates is so highly thought of why hasn't he been offered a headcoaching job? Bates is a good DC but he isn't the best.I have the common sense to wait to see who takes his place, what players are brought in through the draft(A.J. Hawk?), and what players come in through free agency. I also realize that there are other coaches out there that the players will respond to. Jim Bates isn't the only DC that players like to play for.

 
What in hell is Thompson doing?

His personnel moves have been terrible. 
You have to be kidding me. Terrible personnel moves? You mean like landing a starting safety in round 2? Or how about a pretty damn good RB off the street? Or maybe, a great special teams player and up and coming linebacker out of BYU late in the draft. Pure ignorance. Thompson's first rookie class made a lot of contributions in year one. They'll only get better, and I'm looking forward to draft 2.
Id say his choices at guard were pretty awful.Id give him a solid C for this past season.

The positives you mention keep him from being lower...as does the fact that his hands were tied on Wahle and Rivera because of Sherman's idiocy as GM.
What's up sho?Choice are guard weren't great. But how many guys contributed? I count Collins, Murphy (limited by injury,) Underwood, Poppinga, Montgomery, and Whitacker. Not to mention, there is serious buzz about 5th round pick Junius Coston, who Green Bay thinks will compete for a starting guard spot next season.

Now add in the additions of Gado, Herron and Gardner?

To me, that's more like B+. You can crucify him for the guards if you want, but no GM is going to hit on every player. I like his style so far.
Collins and Murphy (pre-injury), Underwood did very little...Poppinga did not impress me all that much but may be a good one, Montgomery I like, but Whitticker? Sure he was a rookie...but the guy did not play all that well.I do like the late additions of Gado, Herron, and Gardner.

I cannot move him up to a B because of how bad the guards were...and how much they missed on how badly Flanagan was hurt. In retrospect, it might have been best to let him go, fill in with Wells at Center, and do their best to keep Wahle.

But the guards were such a big bust I cannot get him above a C. Klemm just did not fit into the system and was not all that good...at least he stayed healthy. O'Dwyer was cut.
Poppinga was a special teams ace who had worked himself into a starting role when he inured his knee. Whitacker played poorly, but he was a seventh round rookie who started. He contributed.And the idea of the knowing how badly Flanagan was hurt is Thompson's fault? Isn't there a highly paid medical staff around that should know these things? They have two very good young centers in Wells and White. They're capable of playing as well as Flanagan.

Bottom line. There was no immediate impact player at #24 that would've somehow raised Green Bay's level of play. So he rolled the dice on a future QB. He then followed it up with Collins and Murphy, for which he was ripped by Green Bay fans. As it turns out, those were both very good picks. If Coston is what they think he is, Poppinga returns healthy, and Montgomery develops a bit more, that's a damn good rookie class.

You can fault Thompson's choice at FA guard replacements, but there was no way they could afford Wahle or Rivera. None, and you can thank Sherman for that.

 
Poppinga was a special teams ace who had worked himself into a starting role when he inured his knee. Whitacker played poorly, but he was a seventh round rookie who started. He contributed.

And the idea of the knowing how badly Flanagan was hurt is Thompson's fault? Isn't there a highly paid medical staff around that should know these things? They have two very good young centers in Wells and White. They're capable of playing as well as Flanagan.

Bottom line. There was no immediate impact player at #24 that would've somehow raised Green Bay's level of play. So he rolled the dice on a future QB. He then followed it up with Collins and Murphy, for which he was ripped by Green Bay fans. As it turns out, those were both very good picks. If Coston is what they think he is, Poppinga returns healthy, and Montgomery develops a bit more, that's a damn good rookie class.

You can fault Thompson's choice at FA guard replacements, but there was no way they could afford Wahle or Rivera. None, and you can thank Sherman for that.
Not knowing how badly flanagan was hurt was not his fault. Gambling on him when he did have very good young centers behind him while letting go 2 all pro guards was.I agree that there was no immediate impact at #24...and have defended Thompson taking Rodgers...and even the rest of the draft. I thought the Packers did very well in that draft.

I do fault Thompson for those Guard replacements...and while it would have been hard to afford Wahle or Rivera...I think something could have been done...if done quickly. Cut Hunt loose earlier, like I said with taking a gamble on Flanagan and this is all hindsight...but cut Flanagan loose, go with the young Centers and do their best to get something worked out for one of the guards...preferably Wahle.

Maybe I could move up to a C+ or B- given how much Sherman's GMing screwed him...but as bad as the offensive line played...it is hard for me to do so.

 
Poppinga was a special teams ace who had worked himself into a starting role when he inured his knee. Whitacker played poorly, but he was a seventh round rookie who started. He contributed.

And the idea of the knowing how badly Flanagan was hurt is Thompson's fault? Isn't there a highly paid medical staff around that should know these things? They have two very good young centers in Wells and White. They're capable of playing as well as Flanagan.

Bottom line. There was no immediate impact player at #24 that would've somehow raised Green Bay's level of play. So he rolled the dice on a future QB. He then followed it up with Collins and Murphy, for which he was ripped by Green Bay fans. As it turns out, those were both very good picks. If Coston is what they think he is, Poppinga returns healthy, and Montgomery develops a bit more, that's a damn good rookie class.

You can fault Thompson's choice at FA guard replacements, but there was no way they could afford Wahle or Rivera. None, and you can thank Sherman for that.
Maybe I could move up to a C+ or B- given how much Sherman's GMing screwed him...but as bad as the offensive line played...it is hard for me to do so.
The offensive line played much better the second half of the season.
 
Poppinga was a special teams ace who had worked himself into a starting role when he inured his knee. Whitacker played poorly, but he was a seventh round rookie who started. He contributed.

And the idea of the knowing how badly Flanagan was hurt is Thompson's fault? Isn't there a highly paid medical staff around that should know these things? They have two very good young centers in Wells and White. They're capable of playing as well as Flanagan.

Bottom line. There was no immediate impact player at #24 that would've somehow raised Green Bay's level of play. So he rolled the dice on a future QB. He then followed it up with Collins and Murphy, for which he was ripped by Green Bay fans. As it turns out, those were both very good picks. If Coston is what they think he is, Poppinga returns healthy, and Montgomery develops a bit more, that's a damn good rookie class.

You can fault Thompson's choice at FA guard replacements, but there was no way they could afford Wahle or Rivera. None, and you can thank Sherman for that.
Maybe I could move up to a C+ or B- given how much Sherman's GMing screwed him...but as bad as the offensive line played...it is hard for me to do so.
The offensive line played much better the second half of the season.
And considering their track record with developing late round offensive lineman, I don't fault Thompson for thinking Whitacker and Coston could contribute immediately. If anything, blame everyone's favorite genius Larry Beightol.
 
How can people be calling this an "awful hire" w/o really knowing much about him. Between N.O. and S.F. he certainly didn't have much to work with. People who know a lot more about what it takes to be an NFL coach are saying he has one of the best offensive minds in the game. Additionally, he fits the current system, and is liked by Favre. This suggests that the head office isn't pushing Favre out the door (which will make some happy, and others upset). SF, while a bottom tier team, never gave up this year, and played their hearts out. To me this is the most important intangible that a coach can offer a team and their fans.
:goodposting: :goodposting: :thumbup: :yes:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top