What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*Semi-official Green Bay Packers Super Bowl Champs thread (2 Viewers)

Thompson Signs Contract Extension

The Green Bay Packers have signed General Manager Ted Thompson to a contract extension and appear close to doing the same with coach Mike McCarthy.

Mark Murphy, the team’s president and CEO, said he and Thompson agreed to the multi-year extension in mid-December but waited to announce it until after the season so it wouldn’t distract from the team’s playoff push that ended with its Super Bowl win last Sunday in Arlington.

Murphy also said Thompson is working on extending McCarthy’s contract and there’s no reason to think a deal won’t be finished soon.

“I have every confidence that it will come to fruition,” Murphy said.

Thompson and McCarthy had two years remaining on their contracts, which last were extended in January 2008. Murphy wouldn’t comment on the length of Thompson’s new deal, but in ’08 the GM and coach had two years remaining and were extended for three seasons, to five years total. That likely is the plan for this current round of extensions as well.

The Packers hired Thompson, 58, as GM in 2005, and he in turn hired McCarthy, 47, in 2006. The two culminated their fifth season working together with an impressive Super Bowl run with a roster built on Thompson’s astute drafting and ultra-cautious approach to free agency, and the ability of McCarthy and his coaching staff to develop those players.

The Packers’ roster features enough young upper-echelon talent, including a franchise quarterback in 27-year-old Aaron Rodgers, to think the team can contend for titles for the next three to five years. Murphy considered it critical to keep in place for as long as possible this duo that heads the team’s football operations.

“We are positioned well for the future,” Murphy said. “Obviously Ted and Mike, and having them locked up, gives me a lot of confidence for the future. And the reality in the NFL, the two key factors are quarterback and defense, and I feel pretty good in both areas.”

Murphy said he began talking to Thompson about an extension during the Packers’ bye week in mid-November and reached agreement a month later. At the time they agreed, the Packers were coming off an upset loss at Detroit and at 8-5 were in danger of getting knocked out of the playoff race. But Murphy said he was impressed with the team’s strong, young nucleus, and how well it had played despite a spate of season-ending injuries that included losing one of their best players, tight end Jermichael Finley, and five other starters.

“At the time I did not think we’d be winning the Super Bowl,” Murphy said, “but I thought Ted had laid a pretty good groundwork for setting the team up for success into the future. It’s a tribute to him and Mike that we were able to finish the season the way we did. Regardless, if we hadn’t won the Super Bowl, I’d still have tremendous confidence in him.”

Murphy would not comment on Thompson’s new salary. Under his previous contract, Thompson was believed to be making about $2 million a year, and his new deal is sure to include a substantial raise, perhaps in the $3 million to $4 million range.

Thompson reached the pinnacle of his profession this year by sticking with and weathering criticism about his ultra-draft-oriented, steady-as-she-goes approach to building a team and re-signing his core players. In a league where the salary cap forces all teams to build through the draft, Thompson’s aversion to free agency is greater than most or even all his peers.

His team has only three players of note he signed as unrestricted free agents: cornerback Charles Woodson, defensive end Ryan Pickett and linebacker Brandon Chillar. In the last two offseasons, he hasn’t signed a noteworthy unrestricted free agent.

Instead, he’s relied on his draft picks and players picked up off the streets, and an inordinate number of them have turned into excellent NFL players: Rodgers (27 years old), Finley (23), outside linebacker Clay Matthews (24), receiver Greg Jennings (27), safety Nick Collins (27) and guard Josh Sitton (24), along with two undrafted cornerbacks, Tramon Williams (27), who was signed off Houston’s practice squad, and Sam Shields (23), signed as an undrafted rookie just last spring.

“(Thompson) has done things the smart way,” Murphy said. “If you want to have sustained success in the NFL you build through the draft and you develop your players. That’s what Ted’s been able to do. The draft is a hit or miss proposition, and you’re not going to hit on every one, but he’s done pretty well.”

One source who knows Thompson well said this week he thinks the GM will work at least until he’s 62, which was the age of retirement for his mentor, former Packers GM Ron Wolf. Murphy wouldn’t say specifically how long he thinks Thompson or McCarthy will continue in their current jobs.

“I hope a long time, they’re pretty good,” Murphy said. “In my position, it’s really comforting to have people that No. 1 are both good at their jobs, that like their jobs and work so well together. I think both have said they want this to be their last job. I know Mike has said that (publicly). I don’t know if Ted has, but I’d like it to be Ted’s last job.”

;) I guess we're stuck with him for awhile.

 
Packers lose WRs coach to Cowboys

The Green Bay Packers suffered their first coaching loss of the offseason when receivers coach Jimmy Robinson signed on with the Dallas Cowboys on Friday.

Robinson, 57, had been the Packers’ receivers coach since 2006. He will coach the same position with the Cowboys for their new coach, Jason Garrett.

Robinson’s ties with Garrett go back to the New York Giants from 2000 through ’03, when Robinson was their receivers coach and Garrett their backup quarterback.

The Cowboys will be Robinson’s sixth NFL team. He’s worked with receivers all of his 21 seasons as an NFL coach.

 
Thompson Signs Contract Extension

The Green Bay Packers have signed General Manager Ted Thompson to a contract extension and appear close to doing the same with coach Mike McCarthy.

Mark Murphy, the team’s president and CEO, said he and Thompson agreed to the multi-year extension in mid-December but waited to announce it until after the season so it wouldn’t distract from the team’s playoff push that ended with its Super Bowl win last Sunday in Arlington.

Murphy also said Thompson is working on extending McCarthy’s contract and there’s no reason to think a deal won’t be finished soon.

“I have every confidence that it will come to fruition,” Murphy said.

Thompson and McCarthy had two years remaining on their contracts, which last were extended in January 2008. Murphy wouldn’t comment on the length of Thompson’s new deal, but in ’08 the GM and coach had two years remaining and were extended for three seasons, to five years total. That likely is the plan for this current round of extensions as well.

The Packers hired Thompson, 58, as GM in 2005, and he in turn hired McCarthy, 47, in 2006. The two culminated their fifth season working together with an impressive Super Bowl run with a roster built on Thompson’s astute drafting and ultra-cautious approach to free agency, and the ability of McCarthy and his coaching staff to develop those players.

The Packers’ roster features enough young upper-echelon talent, including a franchise quarterback in 27-year-old Aaron Rodgers, to think the team can contend for titles for the next three to five years. Murphy considered it critical to keep in place for as long as possible this duo that heads the team’s football operations.

“We are positioned well for the future,” Murphy said. “Obviously Ted and Mike, and having them locked up, gives me a lot of confidence for the future. And the reality in the NFL, the two key factors are quarterback and defense, and I feel pretty good in both areas.”

Murphy said he began talking to Thompson about an extension during the Packers’ bye week in mid-November and reached agreement a month later. At the time they agreed, the Packers were coming off an upset loss at Detroit and at 8-5 were in danger of getting knocked out of the playoff race. But Murphy said he was impressed with the team’s strong, young nucleus, and how well it had played despite a spate of season-ending injuries that included losing one of their best players, tight end Jermichael Finley, and five other starters.

“At the time I did not think we’d be winning the Super Bowl,” Murphy said, “but I thought Ted had laid a pretty good groundwork for setting the team up for success into the future. It’s a tribute to him and Mike that we were able to finish the season the way we did. Regardless, if we hadn’t won the Super Bowl, I’d still have tremendous confidence in him.”

Murphy would not comment on Thompson’s new salary. Under his previous contract, Thompson was believed to be making about $2 million a year, and his new deal is sure to include a substantial raise, perhaps in the $3 million to $4 million range.

Thompson reached the pinnacle of his profession this year by sticking with and weathering criticism about his ultra-draft-oriented, steady-as-she-goes approach to building a team and re-signing his core players. In a league where the salary cap forces all teams to build through the draft, Thompson’s aversion to free agency is greater than most or even all his peers.

His team has only three players of note he signed as unrestricted free agents: cornerback Charles Woodson, defensive end Ryan Pickett and linebacker Brandon Chillar. In the last two offseasons, he hasn’t signed a noteworthy unrestricted free agent.

Instead, he’s relied on his draft picks and players picked up off the streets, and an inordinate number of them have turned into excellent NFL players: Rodgers (27 years old), Finley (23), outside linebacker Clay Matthews (24), receiver Greg Jennings (27), safety Nick Collins (27) and guard Josh Sitton (24), along with two undrafted cornerbacks, Tramon Williams (27), who was signed off Houston’s practice squad, and Sam Shields (23), signed as an undrafted rookie just last spring.

“(Thompson) has done things the smart way,” Murphy said. “If you want to have sustained success in the NFL you build through the draft and you develop your players. That’s what Ted’s been able to do. The draft is a hit or miss proposition, and you’re not going to hit on every one, but he’s done pretty well.”

One source who knows Thompson well said this week he thinks the GM will work at least until he’s 62, which was the age of retirement for his mentor, former Packers GM Ron Wolf. Murphy wouldn’t say specifically how long he thinks Thompson or McCarthy will continue in their current jobs.

“I hope a long time, they’re pretty good,” Murphy said. “In my position, it’s really comforting to have people that No. 1 are both good at their jobs, that like their jobs and work so well together. I think both have said they want this to be their last job. I know Mike has said that (publicly). I don’t know if Ted has, but I’d like it to be Ted’s last job.”

:pickle: I guess we're stuck with him for awhile.
;)
 
Mark Murphy, the team’s president and CEO, said he and Thompson agreed to the multi-year extension in mid-December but waited to announce it until after the season so it wouldn’t distract from the team’s playoff push that ended with its Super Bowl win last Sunday in Arlington.
I love that Murphy nutted up and did this in December even...before they even knew they were in the playoffs.
 
Well deserved extension for TT. He took a team that was in horrible shape salary cap wise due to some very poor contracts, and turned it into a Super Bowl team.

Hard pressed to think of a better gm in the game. Thompson has overseen solid drafts, has done a masterful job of signing UDFA and castoffs from other teams, and has made excellent free agent signings. Not much more you can ask for.

I said several years ago in one of the bumped threads, in response to those clamoring for $$$ free agents like Travis Henry, that I didn't want a stop gap. I wanted TT to rid the team of bad contracts, and build through the draft. He has far exceeded my expectations.

 
Now on to the roster for 2011 (if there is a 2011):

Just some preliminary thoughts:

1. If AJ Hawk doesn't agree to restructure, he needs to be released. I have been very vocal about my displeasure when the Pack passed on Haloti Ngata for Hawk several years ago, but I thought Hawk would still be more solid than he has shown. Desmond Bishop is the better backer at a fraction of the cost.

2. Cullen Jenkins: One of the best players the Packers have on D. He would be a huge loss. Great two way player. But I think a team is going to throw out an absolutely absurd amount of money at him. He is 30 and aside from last year, he has had trouble staying healthy. My gut says he won't be back.

3. Daryn Colledge - Goodbye. I don't care what the price is. Goodbye.

4. They need to resign Charlie Peprah who I think showed a ton of potential, let Atari Bigby walk, and resign John Kuhn.

 
Packers lose WRs coach to Cowboys

The Green Bay Packers suffered their first coaching loss of the offseason when receivers coach Jimmy Robinson signed on with the Dallas Cowboys on Friday.

Robinson, 57, had been the Packers’ receivers coach since 2006. He will coach the same position with the Cowboys for their new coach, Jason Garrett.

Robinson’s ties with Garrett go back to the New York Giants from 2000 through ’03, when Robinson was their receivers coach and Garrett their backup quarterback.

The Cowboys will be Robinson’s sixth NFL team. He’s worked with receivers all of his 21 seasons as an NFL coach.
I don't think this is that big of a loss. I'd like to see our WR corps get a little better.
 
Packers lose WRs coach to Cowboys

The Green Bay Packers suffered their first coaching loss of the offseason when receivers coach Jimmy Robinson signed on with the Dallas Cowboys on Friday.

Robinson, 57, had been the Packers’ receivers coach since 2006. He will coach the same position with the Cowboys for their new coach, Jason Garrett.

Robinson’s ties with Garrett go back to the New York Giants from 2000 through ’03, when Robinson was their receivers coach and Garrett their backup quarterback.

The Cowboys will be Robinson’s sixth NFL team. He’s worked with receivers all of his 21 seasons as an NFL coach.
I don't think this is that big of a loss. I'd like to see our WR corps get a little better.
Well, tough to say. On one hand, he taught our young WRs how to run better routes and get open. OTOH, he wasn't able to teach Jordy & J Jones how to actually catch wide open passes....
 
Now on to the roster for 2011 (if there is a 2011):Just some preliminary thoughts:1. If AJ Hawk doesn't agree to restructure, he needs to be released. I have been very vocal about my displeasure when the Pack passed on Haloti Ngata for Hawk several years ago, but I thought Hawk would still be more solid than he has shown. Desmond Bishop is the better backer at a fraction of the cost.2. Cullen Jenkins: One of the best players the Packers have on D. He would be a huge loss. Great two way player. But I think a team is going to throw out an absolutely absurd amount of money at him. He is 30 and aside from last year, he has had trouble staying healthy. My gut says he won't be back.3. Daryn Colledge - Goodbye. I don't care what the price is. Goodbye. 4. They need to resign Charlie Peprah who I think showed a ton of potential, let Atari Bigby walk, and resign John Kuhn.
1. Hawk played very well last year...he made the calls (not sure Bishop can)...and the rest of the and coaches love him and what he brings to the table. Its not flashy, but its effective. I agree he does need to restructure though. 2. Agreed...and Jolly when applying for reinstatement stated he wanted to stay with Green Bay. 3. Maybe...if Lang is ready. I knock on Colledge alot, but he is at least dependable to be there week in and week out.4. Agreed on both. I keep Kuhn and Hall and let Quinn Johnson walk.
 
I'm not sure they bring Peprah back. They will get Burnett back next year. Who's that leave out of the mix at safety? They'll have Bigby, Burnett, Collins, Martin, A. Smith. How many will they carry at the position?

 
Now on to the roster for 2011 (if there is a 2011):Just some preliminary thoughts:1. If AJ Hawk doesn't agree to restructure, he needs to be released. I have been very vocal about my displeasure when the Pack passed on Haloti Ngata for Hawk several years ago, but I thought Hawk would still be more solid than he has shown. Desmond Bishop is the better backer at a fraction of the cost.2. Cullen Jenkins: One of the best players the Packers have on D. He would be a huge loss. Great two way player. But I think a team is going to throw out an absolutely absurd amount of money at him. He is 30 and aside from last year, he has had trouble staying healthy. My gut says he won't be back.3. Daryn Colledge - Goodbye. I don't care what the price is. Goodbye. 4. They need to resign Charlie Peprah who I think showed a ton of potential, let Atari Bigby walk, and resign John Kuhn.
1. Hawk played very well last year...he made the calls (not sure Bishop can)...and the rest of the and coaches love him and what he brings to the table. Its not flashy, but its effective. I agree he does need to restructure though. 2. Agreed...and Jolly when applying for reinstatement stated he wanted to stay with Green Bay. 3. Maybe...if Lang is ready. I knock on Colledge alot, but he is at least dependable to be there week in and week out.4. Agreed on both. I keep Kuhn and Hall and let Quinn Johnson walk.
Our D seemed to take it up to whole another level when Jenkins was healthy during the postseason... I think keeping him should be top priority... a stud DE is not easy to replace..
 
Mark Murphy, the team’s president and CEO, said he and Thompson agreed to the multi-year extension in mid-December but waited to announce it until after the season so it wouldn’t distract from the team’s playoff push that ended with its Super Bowl win last Sunday in Arlington.
I love that Murphy nutted up and did this in December even...before they even knew they were in the playoffs.
Can you imagine how many heads of TT haters would have exploded had they announced it then?
 
I'm not sure they bring Peprah back. They will get Burnett back next year. Who's that leave out of the mix at safety? They'll have Bigby, Burnett, Collins, Martin, A. Smith. How many will they carry at the position?
I think they let Bigby walk.
 
Our D seemed to take it up to whole another level when Jenkins was healthy during the postseason... I think keeping him should be top priority... a stud DE is not easy to replace..
I agree and love what Jenkins brings to the table...but age and injuries will be on their mind when he comes to the table with a high price tag.
 
I'm not sure they bring Peprah back. They will get Burnett back next year. Who's that leave out of the mix at safety? They'll have Bigby, Burnett, Collins, Martin, A. Smith. How many will they carry at the position?
Smith and Bigby are also UFAs.
 
Our D seemed to take it up to whole another level when Jenkins was healthy during the postseason... I think keeping him should be top priority... a stud DE is not easy to replace..
I agree and love what Jenkins brings to the table...but age and injuries will be on their mind when he comes to the table with a high price tag.
If they overpay Jenkins, I won't be too upset, he is that good (truly one of the most underrated players in the NFL). He is a key to the 3-4 because of his versatility. 3-4 d ends who can rush the passer as well as stuff the run are rare.But . . . I just think a team is going to offer him an absolutely absurd contract offer. And given his injury history and age, I just don't think TT matches. It would be a huge loss.
 
Our D seemed to take it up to whole another level when Jenkins was healthy during the postseason... I think keeping him should be top priority... a stud DE is not easy to replace..
I agree and love what Jenkins brings to the table...but age and injuries will be on their mind when he comes to the table with a high price tag.
If they overpay Jenkins, I won't be too upset, he is that good (truly one of the most underrated players in the NFL). He is a key to the 3-4 because of his versatility. 3-4 d ends who can rush the passer as well as stuff the run are rare.But . . . I just think a team is going to offer him an absolutely absurd contract offer. And given his injury history and age, I just don't think TT matches. It would be a huge loss.
Yup.
 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?

 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
No question. Every time Tramon went to field a punt, I got knots in my stomach. I expect TT to draft a returner in the later rounds.
 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
No question. Every time Tramon went to field a punt, I got knots in my stomach. I expect TT to draft a returner in the later rounds.
He doesn't seem to value the position, so it wouldn't shock me to see TT continue to "make do" with whatever he has.
 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
No question. Every time Tramon went to field a punt, I got knots in my stomach. I expect TT to draft a returner in the later rounds.
He doesn't seem to value the position, so it wouldn't shock me to see TT continue to "make do" with whatever he has.
Well I hope that doesn't include Tramon on punt returns.Brandon Jackson is an UFA, maybe they can fill his spot with a back who can return kicks? James Jones will likely be gone as well. Maybe the WR that they draft/sign can also handle return duties? At least I am hoping.
 
Would TT trade Flynn for a second or 3rd round pick? He was a 7th, but Harrell as the backup makes no sense.

Ted adores his draft picks though.

 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
No question. Every time Tramon went to field a punt, I got knots in my stomach. I expect TT to draft a returner in the later rounds.
May be able to get Shields to do it but that was even scarier last year.Brad Smith and Weems are both free agents. After what Weems did I'd go after him.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hawk will probably restructure in the form of an extension.

Barnett is the one I think is the odd man out. Bishop's coverage skills improved dramatically and that was all Barnett had on him.

Peprah needs to be kept. He's the perfect 3rd safety behind Collins and Burnett (maybe split with Burnett while the kid learns the trade).

James Jones is the biggest piece. I don't think they can afford to let him go. He was on the radio the other day and it seemed like he knew something but couldn't say. I wouldn't be surprised to hear about him getting a contract extension before March 3.

Jenkins will likely be gone. I don't think the Packers can afford him with all the money in the d-line and LBs already. My only worry is if Neal can stay healthy and Jolly can return to form after a year away. Harrell will be cut in camp, unless a miracle occurs.

Someone no one talks about is Mason Crosby. If he were to be allowed to go it would create a huge hole in this team. He needs to stay as well. I know a lot of people are down on him, but it is very, very hard to find a good kicker. Crosby is a good kicker.

Lang and Newhouse are the future of the right side of the line once Bulago moves to LT. I think College may or may not be kept. He'll probably be paid more by someone else though. Clifton will surprise everyone though and play injury free next year giving these guys an opportunity to get better before they are needed to step in. The future of the O-Line is bright.

Some guys have to go and I'm sure Thomspon doesn't mind getting comp picks anyway.

Brandon Chillar, Brad Jones, and Frank Zombo will be fighting for one spot in training camp after the Packers draft a pass rusher in the early rounds of the draft. Zombo probably wins.

Brandon Jackson sniffs FA, but ends up back with the Pack as no one is interested.

 
Hawk will probably restructure in the form of an extension.Barnett is the one I think is the odd man out. Bishop's coverage skills improved dramatically and that was all Barnett had on him.Peprah needs to be kept. He's the perfect 3rd safety behind Collins and Burnett (maybe split with Burnett while the kid learns the trade).James Jones is the biggest piece. I don't think they can afford to let him go. He was on the radio the other day and it seemed like he knew something but couldn't say. I wouldn't be surprised to hear about him getting a contract extension before March 3.Jenkins will likely be gone. I don't think the Packers can afford him with all the money in the d-line and LBs already. My only worry is if Neal can stay healthy and Jolly can return to form after a year away. Harrell will be cut in camp, unless a miracle occurs.Someone no one talks about is Mason Crosby. If he were to be allowed to go it would create a huge hole in this team. He needs to stay as well. I know a lot of people are down on him, but it is very, very hard to find a good kicker. Crosby is a good kicker.Lang and Newhouse are the future of the right side of the line once Bulago moves to LT. I think College may or may not be kept. He'll probably be paid more by someone else though. Clifton will surprise everyone though and play injury free next year giving these guys an opportunity to get better before they are needed to step in. The future of the O-Line is bright.Some guys have to go and I'm sure Thomspon doesn't mind getting comp picks anyway.Brandon Chillar, Brad Jones, and Frank Zombo will be fighting for one spot in training camp after the Packers draft a pass rusher in the early rounds of the draft. Zombo probably wins.Brandon Jackson sniffs FA, but ends up back with the Pack as no one is interested.
Agree on Barnett and Jenkins and hope they keep James Jones. Do you think Bulaga could play LT? Not so sure after watching this season.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
Obviously if it is an area that needs to be improved then it is the responsibility of the GM to address that area. Just because they won the SB doesn't mean they can ignore the special teams play. :confused:
 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
I am amazed at the complete lack of football knowledge you display with many of your posts.
 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
Obviously if it is an area that needs to be improved then it is the responsibility of the GM to address that area. Just because they won the SB doesn't mean they can ignore the special teams play. :confused:
(As said above) Brad Smith and Weems are free agents, do you see any interest there? Returners should be fairly cheap.Leon Washington is too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
Obviously if it is an area that needs to be improved then it is the responsibility of the GM to address that area. Just because they won the SB doesn't mean they can ignore the special teams play. :confused:
(As said above) Brad Smith and Weems are free agents, do you see any interest there? Returners should be fairly cheap.

Leon Washington is too.
Would love for them to sign Washington, as he is a fantastic kick returner and I feel was woefully underutilized in the running game by the Seahawks. He could replace Brandon Jackson as the 3rd down back, and solve the kickoff return issue.
 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
I am amazed at the complete lack of football knowledge you display with many of your posts.
Well, perhaps he should take the lead from your post here and display such stunning intelligence. I mean really, why be such an ### with your response? He's right in some ways - TT doesn't value the return game (obviously, since he never takes steps to shore it up) and the team just won the Super Bowl with abysmal special teams. Perhaps you could provide a more compelling response instead of just insulting the guy.
 
Brandon Chillar, Brad Jones, and Frank Zombo will be fighting for one spot in training camp after the Packers draft a pass rusher in the early rounds of the draft. Zombo probably wins.
Brad Jones should be done. Zombo and Walden completely outplayed him. The defense was far better with them than with Jones in the lineup.
 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
I am amazed at the complete lack of football knowledge you display with many of your posts.
Well, perhaps he should take the lead from your post here and display such stunning intelligence. I mean really, why be such an ### with your response? He's right in some ways - TT doesn't value the return game (obviously, since he never takes steps to shore it up) and the team just won the Super Bowl with abysmal special teams. Perhaps you could provide a more compelling response instead of just insulting the guy.
Well...since you agree with the reasoning that there is no need to address an area that could be improved because the team won the SB equates to thinking the Packers don't need to do anything because they won the SB. No need to explain why that is wrong on so many levels to people that think that way.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
I am amazed at the complete lack of football knowledge you display with many of your posts.
Well, perhaps he should take the lead from your post here and display such stunning intelligence. I mean really, why be such an ### with your response? He's right in some ways - TT doesn't value the return game (obviously, since he never takes steps to shore it up) and the team just won the Super Bowl with abysmal special teams. Perhaps you could provide a more compelling response instead of just insulting the guy.
The responsibility of the GM is to always try and make the team better. The special teams play and return game of the Packers this year wasn't very good and can be improved. To think that it doesn't need to be addressed because they won the SB is absurd. Why is that so hard to understand?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
I am amazed at the complete lack of football knowledge you display with many of your posts.
Well, perhaps he should take the lead from your post here and display such stunning intelligence. I mean really, why be such an ### with your response? He's right in some ways - TT doesn't value the return game (obviously, since he never takes steps to shore it up) and the team just won the Super Bowl with abysmal special teams. Perhaps you could provide a more compelling response instead of just insulting the guy.
The responsibility of the GM is to always try and make the team better. The special teams play and return game of the Packers this year wasn't very good and can be improved. To think that it doesn't need to be addressed because they won the SB is absurd. Why is that so hard to understand?
:goodposting: It isn't "hard to understand" in the least. Clearly the Packers don't NEED to fix the return game. However, it would certainly be preferred if they did. The language matters here -- and the word NEED is a bit strong, no? Given that the team just won a title without even an average return game?
 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
I am amazed at the complete lack of football knowledge you display with many of your posts.
Well, perhaps he should take the lead from your post here and display such stunning intelligence. I mean really, why be such an ### with your response? He's right in some ways - TT doesn't value the return game (obviously, since he never takes steps to shore it up) and the team just won the Super Bowl with abysmal special teams. Perhaps you could provide a more compelling response instead of just insulting the guy.
Well...since you agree with the reasoning that there is no need to address an area that could be improved because the team won the SB equates to thinking the Packers don't need to do anything because they won the SB. No need to explain why that is wrong on so many levels to people that think that way.
See my post immediately preceding this. You seem to live in a bizarre black-white world. Obviously the Pack could improve the team by developing a better return game. But that isn't the language above that you took issue with. Sabertooth said they didn't NEED that. Which is clearly true. For whatever reason, you disagree with simple logic and a nuanced view.
 
I don't know if people are missing one of the biggest holes the Packers have right now. They need a returner who can actually be a consistent returner. I am not talking a Desmond Howard productivity, although that would be great, but something better than what they have. No way should there #1 CB or #3 WR be returning the ball. Obviously they will not draft one with a 1st rounder but this needs to be addressed, no?
Obviously they don't NEED that. They just won the Super Bowl with a mediocre return game.
I am amazed at the complete lack of football knowledge you display with many of your posts.
I am amazed that you think anyone cares.
 
We're never talk about him but how about Tim Mashtay ? This guy is a STUD. He's elite at only 21... another product of TT.

Also, he's a big part of the team succes. Whitout his awsome punt, I don't think the Pack D would have been as dominant...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
See my post immediately preceding this. You seem to live in a bizarre black-white world. Obviously the Pack could improve the team by developing a better return game. But that isn't the language above that you took issue with. Sabertooth said they didn't NEED that. Which is clearly true. For whatever reason, you disagree with simple logic and a nuanced view.
:popcorn: Simple logic? There is nothing logical about what Sabertooth wrote or that you agree with. Do you realize how whacked it is to think any team doesn't need to address a particular weakness because they won a championship.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We're never talk about him but how about Tim Mashtay ? This guy is a STUD. He's elite at only 21... another product of TT.Also, he's a big part of the team succes. Whitout his awsome punt, I don't think the Pack D would have been as dominant...
He came through in the clutch a lot! He really came on as the season progressed. A big bright spot this year for the special teams.
 
We're never talk about him but how about Tim Mashtay ? This guy is a STUD. He's elite at only 21... another product of TT.Also, he's a big part of the team succes. Whitout his awsome punt, I don't think the Pack D would have been as dominant...
He was one of the MVPs of the historic run at the end of the season. He was money.
 
See my post immediately preceding this. You seem to live in a bizarre black-white world. Obviously the Pack could improve the team by developing a better return game. But that isn't the language above that you took issue with. Sabertooth said they didn't NEED that. Which is clearly true. For whatever reason, you disagree with simple logic and a nuanced view.
:lmao: Simple logic? There is nothing logical about what Sabertooth wrote or that you agree with. Do you realize how whacked it is to think any team doesn't need to address a particular weakness because they won a championship.
Please explain why this is a NEED. Not a want, a NEED. Why do they NEED is and what happens if they fail to address it.
 
See my post immediately preceding this. You seem to live in a bizarre black-white world. Obviously the Pack could improve the team by developing a better return game. But that isn't the language above that you took issue with. Sabertooth said they didn't NEED that. Which is clearly true. For whatever reason, you disagree with simple logic and a nuanced view.
:lmao: Simple logic? There is nothing logical about what Sabertooth wrote or that you agree with. Do you realize how whacked it is to think any team doesn't need to address a particular weakness because they won a championship.
Would it be ideal? Yes.Is it ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY? (e.g., will the sky fall if it doesn't happen?) Obviously not. I can't explain it in simpler terms than that.
 
See my post immediately preceding this. You seem to live in a bizarre black-white world. Obviously the Pack could improve the team by developing a better return game. But that isn't the language above that you took issue with. Sabertooth said they didn't NEED that. Which is clearly true. For whatever reason, you disagree with simple logic and a nuanced view.
:lmao: Simple logic? There is nothing logical about what Sabertooth wrote or that you agree with. Do you realize how whacked it is to think any team doesn't need to address a particular weakness because they won a championship.
Please explain why this is a NEED. Not a want, a NEED. Why do they NEED is and what happens if they fail to address it.
:unsure:
 
See my post immediately preceding this. You seem to live in a bizarre black-white world. Obviously the Pack could improve the team by developing a better return game. But that isn't the language above that you took issue with. Sabertooth said they didn't NEED that. Which is clearly true. For whatever reason, you disagree with simple logic and a nuanced view.
:rant: Simple logic? There is nothing logical about what Sabertooth wrote or that you agree with. Do you realize how whacked it is to think any team doesn't need to address a particular weakness because they won a championship.
Please explain why this is a NEED. Not a want, a NEED. Why do they NEED is and what happens if they fail to address it.
C'mon, Sabertooth. What is going on with you? If you really need someone to explain why the Packers need to improve on any weakness they have then you really shouldn't post about football.Do you expect the Packers to not do anything to try and make the team better just because they won the Super Bowl? Just stop because you are hitting new lows here.
 
See my post immediately preceding this. You seem to live in a bizarre black-white world. Obviously the Pack could improve the team by developing a better return game. But that isn't the language above that you took issue with. Sabertooth said they didn't NEED that. Which is clearly true. For whatever reason, you disagree with simple logic and a nuanced view.
:goodposting: Simple logic? There is nothing logical about what Sabertooth wrote or that you agree with. Do you realize how whacked it is to think any team doesn't need to address a particular weakness because they won a championship.
Please explain why this is a NEED. Not a want, a NEED. Why do they NEED is and what happens if they fail to address it.
When a team has a weakness they realize they NEED to try to improve in that area to make it better. That is the ultimate goal of a team. To take proactive steps to try and always make your team better.I know this seems complicated for you to understand so let us know why TT should do nothing to try and improve in an area of weakness. That doesn't seem like something a great GM would do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
See my post immediately preceding this. You seem to live in a bizarre black-white world. Obviously the Pack could improve the team by developing a better return game. But that isn't the language above that you took issue with. Sabertooth said they didn't NEED that. Which is clearly true. For whatever reason, you disagree with simple logic and a nuanced view.
:goodposting: Simple logic? There is nothing logical about what Sabertooth wrote or that you agree with. Do you realize how whacked it is to think any team doesn't need to address a particular weakness because they won a championship.
Please explain why this is a NEED. Not a want, a NEED. Why do they NEED is and what happens if they fail to address it.
:unsure:
:lmao: at anyone agreeing with the logic that a team doesn't NEED to address a weakness just because they won a Super Bowl. What's next? You and Sabertooth telling us the Packers should trade Finely because they don't need him since they won a Super Bowl without him?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top