Excellent article from Rob Reischel on TT and his drafting.

Resichel points out that Ted Thompson, the so-called "draft guru", has managed to draft one player in four seasons to make the Pro Bowl (Nick Collins). 1 player out of 51 draft picks.

Reischel provides a brief outline on the current Packers team:



Resichel then outlines Ron Wolfe and his draft history:



Article

Thoughts?

packer record alltimers let go by tt

bf (well duh)
longwell who has tacked on 384 points as a vike
green
sharper whose 25 int with the vikes/saints put his total at 61 surpassing dillon's 52
and his 11 returnd for td surpass adderly's 7

TT is clearly a Vikings plant here to wreck the team.

LOL. I have to admit, in my worst 'tinfoil hat' conspiracy moments I have wondered if TT wasn't 'planted' by the NFL in GB to systematically and methodically dismantle the team because the NFL has decided that the Green Bay market is no longer in the long term best interest of the league. Not that I believe that, but the 'what if's' have crossed my mind.

What was the over/under on threads that would be started this week with the same general theme?

I never saw the line but I'm guessing those who took the over are cashing in their winning tickets at the window by now.

This is a mostly stupid article. Here's why:



Young players have to improve to get to the Pro Bowl. And as we all know, none of the young players on the Packers roster will improve or post top level seasons. Certainly not Rodgers. Or Jennings. Or Jordy Nelson. Or JerMicheal Finley. Or BJ Raji. Or Clay Matthews. Or Quinn Johnson. Or James Jones. Or Matt Flynn.

Have to ask- were you j/k or serious?

"IF" we ever find an O-Line; A-Rod, Jennings (if he quits dropping balls) and Finley have a shot at PB/Alternate.

Mathews has the look baring injury to someday get there as well.

James Jones- if a WR wants the kiss of death in GB; just have someone say you are the next Sharpe. That has happened to Mickens and Ferguson. And of course they said he was the second coming of Sharpe also.

Didn't work out so great for the original, either.

Not sure why this isn't covered by one of the other 100 TT threads, but oh well. I'm no fan of TT these days, but the number of draft picks that have been to the Pro Bowl is meaningless to me. Pro Bowl is a popularity contest, not an honest evaluation of the best players at a position.

Deus Nova, interesting article, but essentially off the point. As noted earlier, the Packers are dealing with a much younger team. Plus, how many posters on here posited Barnett, Hawk, etc., etc. as Pro-Bowlers after their first year. No, this has nothing to do with Reischel's article, but I really believe the recent loss to TB has warped the thinking on this site, and maybe with the professional article writers. Now, we are looking for reasons to be negative and bash TT and MM, rather than analyzing things from a more dispassionate perspective.

Wlso, what Reischel ignored was that Wolf dipped into FA to pick up some crucial pieces to the puzzle of putting together a special team. TT has done that sparingly, and should be told, in no uncertain terms, that he needs to get more veterans on the team- or else. And, again, I am not advocating a big "first day" spree, but look carefully at the "second tier" guys, and get more active. Or else.

However, we should all understand that TT is dealing with limitations. A small, white city in a state that has a high state tax in a cold climate. Not exactly inviting to the average NFL player. So, TT should understand that sometimes, he'd have to overpay for a particular FA. And then, of course, if the player didn't play up to expectations, we'd be howling for his firing. What a great job!

I agree with Phishtar. Reischel is presenting a particular perspective on a set of facts. Another writer could take the same facts and write an article quite complimentary to Thompson. Especially in regard to "eventual" probowlers. I have no doubt if the Packers were winning more that a number of Thompson's picks would eventually go to the probowl. Winning generates winning and people play better on winning teams, plus observers tune in more closely to the team's players when voting for probowl.

Thompson came from a different era. He said himself that the game was getting too difficult for him, what with free agency and caps. He was also there at the beginning of free agency, when (as has been pointed out in these forums many times) teams hadn't yet discovered the ways to protect their top players. If this team had a Reggie White on it, we'd all be singing a different tune. And if this team had had a Fritz Shurmur as DC for the last five years, we'd likely be singing different melodies too. Maybe we do now, in Capers - that remains to be seen. All this quite aside from head coach (I give the nod to Wolf's team for that and since the GM picks the coach, that's a point for Wolf) and QB (it's hard to know how that will work out, but both GM's got lucky on that - I'd give a tip to Wolf on that too for recognizing the possibilities in Favre and having the confidence to go for it no matter the cost).

I don't think there's any question that one has to give Wolf the nod over Thompson, but Wolf was a much more experienced guy at the time than Thompson. There just aren't that many Wolf's floating around the NFL. Or Wolves, if you prefer. I do think Wolf had a style that helped propel the team forward, that had a positive effect on players. It's hard to say what's going on with Thompson and how players relate to him.

There are arguments to be made along the lines Reischel was chasing, granted, but not with the approach Reischel took. That was a very hindsight type of insight, except that he doesn't have that hindsight with Thompson.

A small white city where it's hard to get black guys to play unless you over-pay? Really have we regressed that far? Woodson had heard the stories and once he got there; loves GB. We have once of the best facilities to practice and workout in; not to mention Lambeau Field. Things aren't like they were when Wolf took over. Now if it's because of our coaches or whatever; I might buy into that; but not the way you put it. In fact I can kind of see history repeating itself. Once again we have a hot and up and coming QB that gives us an opportunity to win. Add in a few pieces (HC maybe?) and we are there. Still believe this team is under-achieving and is more talented then it is showing.

The most telling part of the article to me was the part about how quickly Wolf recognized a failed draft pick/player and got rid of them. While with TT we still have guys like Harrell, Jackson, Bush, Montgomery, Giacomini taking up roster spots.

I'm all for moving on to the next one if the first one aint workin. Another Ron Wolf strenght.

If you have not already read "The Packer Way" by Wolf.

He made hard decisions, he drafted well, AND he made quite a few move in FA. That does not mean one should make moves just to make moves, but he did well in bringing in talent to the same 'hard-sell' environment that TT must operate.

The model was created, TT has just forgotten part of the script.

was there a scene in the script that dealt with unloading all-pros?

The Packers need to decide if being a 500 team is acceptable.....if so, they keep TT and we as fans continue to suffer and complain while we watch other teams win championships.

TT was 32-32 in Seattle in his first 4 years and 17-15 as GM with Holmgren as his head coach his last 2 years. Seattle was 41-39 with TT involved in management and player personell decisions in his 5 years there with one playoff appearance.

TT is 31-33 as GM in Green Bay for his first 4 years and 27-21 with Mcarthy as coach in three years. It appears the packers will again finish somewhere near a 500 record again this year and not playing in the post season. Again it's pretty simple to see where or what to expect of the Packers with TT as GM.

It's time for the executive board do the right thing, fire TT and his current head coach. If they do nothing, Packer fans can expect more of the same.....watching other teams win and dream of teams of the past.