Given that the last time the Pack made it to the "Big Show" was '97, I was wondering what the people on Packer Chatters deemed an acceptable amount of time for TT to win it all? Yeah I can't spell.

I'm not saying this to p&#$ anyone off, but does anyone remember when THompon had fired Sherman, and there were many people claiming that "with free agency, a team is only a year away from the Super Bowl!" ?

I'm guessing that claim has been revised since then!

Actually, no. I don't really remember a tidal wave of sentiment of this ilk. However, I do know I'm still hearing on this board, occassionally, that the team is "close", though the prevailing sentiment seems to be the opposite. The Packers were coming off an extraordinary streak of great seasons without getting the ultimate prize. Optimism seemed to be warranted at that time. Now, it seems, it is more like pessimism reigns. I haven't looked at my question about who is involved in the drafting process yet- again, I really don't believe TT is working in a vacuum- be it a Kirby, an Oreck (just checked the spelling- my wife wanted it, but, man, this thing really sucks- which in a vacuum cleaner is GREAT!), or a Hoover. I also know because of the hack attacks, many posts have been lost, so delving into the archives would probably prove fruitless.

Before I die. I am 21 so unless something happens he has some time lol.

I keep reading in the posts about TT plan. I guess I was curious when people think the Pack's return should happen? It was my theory that TT had around 4 years before they should start to be a serious contender again. TT may get an an additional 2, in the eye of the public, if Favre retires. I don't really perceive this so much as a TT thing but as a Packer thing and they have been on the slow slide since '96, IMO. I personally don't see the Pack returning to the SB for a while, that could mean 15, 18 or even 20 year hiatus from the big game. Get where I am going, although they are not having back-to-back 3 game winning seasons. Ultimately, Packer management will decide how long but I believe public opinion carries more weight than it maybe given credit.

In TT defense, the team has shown improvement and Seattle was a strong contender and it is not his fault how bad the Sherminator crippled the team.

You're right, I did a pretty fruitless search over at archive.org, and found a thread, but couldn't get into it.

http://web.archive.org/web/20060207005621/...php?showforum=4

It's about the 15th one down, but as I recall, there were some claims in there about how the Rams and Panthers went from "worst to first" in only one year.

I think people forget how poorly Sherman drafted. He only got us a handful of serviceable players over a couple of drafts. That'll just kill a team and the 2005 season and 2006 season are a result of that. Our defense seems to have come around, our offense isn't that bad they just have problems scoring in the red zone. If we can fix the red zone offense and improve the special teams this year I don't see why we can't contend this season.

I think a playoff appearence in the third year after taking over a team that was consistantly in the playoffs is reasonable. At the very least a winning record. He needs to prove he is on the right path this year.

In all fairness, I don't think we can keep blaming Sherman. What was the condition of the team when Wolf took over? How long did it take to start showing results? This is the third year of TT's plan, it should give us a idea whether it's working or not.

As far as Thompson goes, I expect steady progress made each year. I'll give him a little fudge factor this year because I dont think this team was as good last year as its record indicated, but I expect better play. I was a full blown supporter of getting rid of Sherman, and was often crticized about holding TT to the same standards. I do. The object is for this team to get to the Super Bowl over a reasonable amount of time. I have questioned his picks, questioned some of his moves, wondered aloud in my best Lombardi voice "What the hell is going on out here?" To me, he's doing OK. I told many of you this would take time and you would need patience. I havent agreed with all of his picks, but they are his picks to sink or swim with.

My biggest concern with Thompson is I dont think he's a salesman. In todays NFL, You have to go out to FAs and sell your team, your city, your fanchise. He talks to slow, and comes across kinda creepy. Getting key FA"s is critical to building a winner, and if you arent willing to spend the money, players arent going to be sold by Thompson. It eventually will be his downfall unless his current plan of building almost exclusively through the draft works, and I have my doubts about that.

GM, the actual question that started this thread was "how long is a reasonable amount of time." I'd say two to three more years, then bring in someone who is willing to "swing for the fences" (which TT simply seems unable to do). Yes, I realize that means that it would be Rodgers (or whoever) being the QB in the "big game" and not Favre. I am a Packer fan and an admirer of Favre. After Favre has retired, I'll still be a Packer fan, and an admirer of Favre- only not as a player anymore.

Wolf was abe to get White in 93. That played a huge role in being able to get other good FA to come here. Without White you have to question would have the Packers got those other good FA to come here and could they have gotten to the SB when they did?

Frankly, I think that if we don't make the playoffs by 2008, we're in trouble.

I did a statistical study years back. Did you know that there are only three head coaches in the history of the entire NFL who started their seventh full season without making it to their conference championship game?

I can't remember the other one, but I found two of them with Packer ties: Bart Starr did it as HC of the Packers, and Mike Holmgren made it as HC of the Seahawks.

Mike Sherman would have joined the exclusive club had he stayed on another season.

I think that is pretty indicative that making it to your conference championship game is something that is expected, probably no later than your fourth or fifth year.

If the Packers have no major injuries and if they done make the playoffs in 07 or 08 yeah TT and MM will proably both be no longer with the Packers.

I couldn't agree more. But the point is that Wolf did go out and get him. Reggie didn't come cheap either. At the time he was the highest paid defensive player in the game and I believe the third highest in the NFL.

Wow. I know how much you love statistics...

I do not think that is a fair assesement of Thompson. You say he is unable swing for the fences. But in reality the team is not yet ready for the finishing touches when a FA could make a difference of a champoionship or not. Now if by the end of 2008 TT can not land a FA to shore up the remaining spot or spots that will take us over the top then I would agree it would be time to bring someone else in.

No doubt.

Statistics are like a gun. The gun itself isn't dangerous, it's who is wielding it, and for what underlying purpose!

76 ... that's where you confuse me. Wolf picked up Reggie in 1993 which was a full 3 years prior to getting to the Superbowl. So, are you saying that we are more than 3 years away from being a serious contender? Wolf used Free Agency and Trades along with the draft to make the team better throughout his stay here.

And, from what I can see thus far, Wolf had a whole different style of getting FA's to GB which was truly one of the least desirable places in the NFL. He was a saleman. He was confident. He was decisive. When Reggie became available, he went after him aggressively (just like he did Favre). He picked him up at the airport himself instead of leaving Reggie to find his own way to Lambeau. He offered him a lot of money. And, even then he didn't let it die. He and Holmgren both continued to smooze Reggie, and, let him know how much they wanted him. I just don't see Thompson doing that for anyone.

Yes Wolf gave White a lot of money but he was worth it. None of the garbage that was out there this year deserved money. It was the worst FA crop in history and I dont blame TT one bit for not wasting money on them.

The days of the franchise FAs are pretty much over. You can find some good players to build around, but you have to be able to sell the Packers and GB.

How long should the should it take to get back to the superbowl? Well, on average it takes 32 years to win the superbowl. I wonder what the average GM duration is for the first superbowl victory, so I did a quick survey . . .

Just off hand I am thinking 7-9 years.

The last 5 teams to win the Superbowl are:

Indianapolis - Bill Polian First Season-1997 SB-2006 - 9 seasons.
Pittsburgh - Bill Cowher fs-1992 SB-2005 - 14 seasons
New England - Bill Belicheck fs-2000 SB-2001 - 2 seasons
Tampa - Rick McKay fs-1993 SB-2003 - 11 seasons
Baltimore - Ozzie Newsome fs-1996 SB-2000 - 5 seasons


Although Ozzie did not receive the title until 2002, he acted in the capacity as far as I know.

Best post I've seen in this thread.

A LOT of those players are gone. Check the rosters from 2001-2004. It's not very resonable to think that that 'team' still exists. Remember, the life expectancy of an NFL player is less than four years on average.

It was his descision to scrap that team almost completely. I do agree that some players were getting old and needed to be replaced but others that where let go have went on to other teams and have been succesfull. I personally feel at this day and age in the NFL a team doesn't have to have several years of downtime. I believe that any team that can't produce a winning record within a three year period, rebuilding or not, has more issues to deal with than player personnel.

The NFL has changed a great deal since White came to Green Bay in terms of free agency. I doubt in this day and age that Philly would have ever let the Packers grab White. What I am trying to express is that Thompson is building up the core of the team through the draft. This is a slow method but it seems to be the safest and most logical method. When it all comes together. (I am betting on 2008) I would think that Ted Thompson would spend the going price even if it is high for a FA that would be the finishing touch or touches to the team. Even if it meant going for a Moss or Keyshawn if the need for a WR was the last link to make a run at the Super Bowl with a REAL contender.

We will never know if they were worth anything or not. Most were overpaid, I agree, but it sure would be nice to still have Green on this team. It seemed like a high price at the time but the market changed. Gas sure as hell isn't worth three dollars a gallon but if you want to go somewhere, you've got to pay the price.

In answer to the question of the thread, I have always maintained that TT will be gone when the Pack makes the next SB. He is building a good base w/ decent players and building depth. He does not have the ability to go after the 'special' players you need to take this group to the next level. Someone stated that you need to be a salesman and Wolf and Holmy were that and they brought in players that were salesmen also. White Sean Jones, Keith Jackson(once he got here) Santana Dotson, Don Beebe, amoung others. All FA might I add. All those guys were promoters of the team and the town. You have to build that base also. All this being said, I say if TT does not show vast improvement by season's end of '08, he's gone. MM's contract is up at that point and it will be the opportunity for Jones to clean house. IMO

Not only is casey right again - that Wolf got the major parts of the SB team first and then filled in around them - but the major piece was favre and he can BEFORE Reggie

Young dominant players just don't fall into your hands


Wolf was willing to risk, and did take abuse over favre, while TT has not made a single transaction like getting a White or Favre


to the contrary

he lets to notch starters walk becuase he (TT) can not make a fair initial offer to them
(green and walker)

this is the opposite of Wolf

The fact that he took abuse over Favre tells me that people at the time thought he was not going to be any good. He hadn't shown anything up to that point to make fans think he was going to be special. Today, people are abusing TT because they don't think his signings will ever be any good. So, if they were wrong about Favre, how do we know they are right about TT's guys? It seems to me that TT is EXACTLY like Wolf. He is taking a chance that relative unknowns (see 1992 Favre) will turn out to be superstars.

To get back to the thread topic, I say around 5 years.

So your saying no one out there could have helped this team???????
I differ with you on that in such huge terms it is not funny.

TT is afraid to spend money, seems very afraid to make a real push for anyone and if he keeps the attitude that the market is overpaid.....then we will never get anyone. this market is not going down and the players will not take less money.
If he wants to low ball players , then this orginization will suffer cause of that.

I have said my point so many times that it must be equal with the draft and FA, if not we will ALWAYS be in a state of rebuilding......and that is a slam dunk!

Back to the point of the thread. From some of the responses, the poll might not be clear enough. I voted from the time TT came aboard. Not how many more years it will take.

And I think there is a progression. After 3-4 years you should be making the playoffs. A couple years after that, you should be making the league championship. After that, making the super bowl is a crap shoot.

Those special players you are talking about are rarely available in FA. Reggie White was a one time ocurance because Philly wasn't allowed to Franchise him. Yes, Thompson hasn't made a big Trade or moved up in the draft to get a highly touted prospect but - FA is what it is: players who were not kept by their current teams. In truth, the Packers best chance of getting a true difference maker is in the draft.

I am not saying that FA doesn't help your team. I am saying that is not where you find special players.

Anyway, to the topic.

IMO This year the team needs to show improvement in play and hopefully in record - or else I would think TT's job is in question.

0 - 5 wins - in big trouble.
6 - 8 Wins - in trouble but need to look at play on the filed to judge.
9 - 16 Wins - good job.

Your right, I meant from the first day on the job to whenever for the GM. I think the general consensus is it takes 2-3 years for draftees to develop, maybe I am wrong on that. So I figured 4 years maybe 5 tops.

The Pack has a top 5 or 10 QB and wideout, who knows next year. I like what they have done as far as building the core of the team but I agree with GM about selling GB. They need to sign some/a big name to help pull in the FA they want. GB should not be getting turned down by second tier talent. I would think the front office should find that unaccetable? Look at the 49ers, they stink but they seemed to pull in some big names. Yeah, they paid some bucks, it will be interesting to see how good they are this year.

It is my prediction that if the Pack does not make a serious run this year or the next, there will be trouble for TT and even maybe MM? Especially, with Harlan retiring.

It's not a question of whether they could have helped the team. It's could they have helped the team at the price they cost. Also I'm positive there were some that TT wanted, for the right price, but other circumstances prevented them signing with us.
You don't really believe ANY team signed every FA it has interest in, do you???
The Bears were just in the Super Bowl, do you believe they were built with EQUAL Parts of FA and draft??
If they could get there with their roster, I really don't think we are all that far away.

Funny thing: Favre's draft stock dropped because he had some of his intestines removed because of a car accident, causing people to question how much punishment he could take in the NFL.

Sound familiar?

Au contraire, I don't see any reason to believe that TT is "afraid" of anything.
a. he isn't afraid of the fans, doesn't coddle to them....follows his plan
b. he isn't afraid of his boss nor his board because they work in concert
c. he isn't afraid of loosing his job....if you had made $3M a year for the last 2.5 years would you be in the poor house if you lost your job ? nnnnnnnnope !!!!! he'll never HAVE TO work again.

instead he is : strong in his principals, confident in his plan, and supported by his superiors........ his path is thru the development of a core of solid players thru the draft....2005's draft was from the hip because he didn't have a lot of time with his scouts and personnel folks....2006 he had things well tuned and it showed...2007 he pulled some rabbits out of the hat.......he was strong enough of conviction to pull the tab on some under the mainstream radar athletes.......certainly not the actions of a wobbly kneed pussy. Regards, Hats

If he doesnt win within the next two years, he had better be a wobbly kneed pussy, cause he will be out of a job!!!!
and when brett leaves next year, it will take more than two years to make this team a winner again, much more than two years.

They need to compete for the North crown next year - that's a reasonable benchmark. They started this 'rebuild' a couple years after the Niners, and are now about a year behind the Niners in the process. Thomson is, to me, doing the right thing as a poker player.

This is just my opinion, but "the right price" is low balling players with there contract. in todays market someone will pay it, and if you dont you will not get the good talent, period.

as for the bears, look at what they did. there Oline expect the center was built thru free agency. Muhammed was a free agent, thomas jones was a free agent (even though he is gone now, the point is last years superbowl) desmond clark was a free agent. on defense Ogunleye was a trade, hillenmeyer came from us, manning jr was a free agent.
right there you are looking at 10 players not drafted by the bears, i would say that is a pretty good indication that the bears did NOT due it purely thru the draft.

#4 had a lot to do with that also

Excellent point...would like to add that the dynamics of the league is changing before us and TT has not/will not adjust. With the increased revenue streams in the league, I do not think you will ever see teams in "cap hell". GM's can structure deals to avoid most if not all risk in signing big dollar FA's. The market will dictate how much a QB or DB go for in FA.

A prefect example is the Brewers. Did the Brewers overpay for Supan based on his numbers..YES....was it a good investment...YES.....the reason they overpayed is that the market dictated that a quality starter demanded what Suppan was was asking.

Was Green, Clements really worth the contract they signed...no...but the market dictated the value and you have to adjust to the market

Good post.

I don't believe we were in "cap hell" to the extent that it is portrayed. TT was fortunate to some degree to be taking over about the time that Joe Johnson's, and, Hunt's cap hit was disappearing, and, KGB's cap hit was greatly diminished. Wahle's and Sharper's contract was never meant to continue on without a renegotiation. In fact, they both fully expected a renegotiation instead of paying the full roster bonuses that were due. In addition, the cap ceiling increased greatly both last year and this year.

I have read other posts of yours Packinatl regarding the Packers "cap hell" being overblown. (I hope I am not misquoting you.) I believe that is correct. I think it is great that we have excess cap dollars to spend, but, I don't believe that TT is a miracle worker for resolving our "cap hell". I think a lot of it would have resolved itself.

Regarding your other statement about how teams are handling cap restraints a lot better, and, writing contracts to avoid cap problems - I also agree with those thoughts. This is something that LA has written about also. Contracts are written to avoide future issues. Accounting practices have evolved with experience. Cap ceilings continue to increase. Proof of this can be see by looking at the cap situation of the teams before the start of FA this year. The majority of teams had in excess of $15 million dollars in cap-room. I believe there were only about 3 teams that had minimal cap $$$ to spend. One of those teams was Oakland. That problem was erased by releasing Moss. Poof. Cap problem gone.

Good point. I also keep hearing how the Saints getting to the NFC Playoff game last year was a fluke. I don't know how you can call it a fluke when they signed 5 defensive FA starters in 2006 and Drew Brees. And, I don't know if anyone noticed, but, even though their team was good enough to make strides in the playoffs in 2006, they continued to upgrade via FA and the draft in 2007. This seems like a plan to me, and, not a "fluke".

Look at Favre's stats and rating the last couple years. What makes you think it will be that hard to replace his production. Yes they will miss the other intangibles, and even though he "may be" the best to ever play the game, he no longer is irreplaceable. He most certainly doesn't win games by himself and is depending on a solid team around him(which he should).



So their all-pro line were FA's(except for the actual all-pro!), the TE they just replaced with a #1 pick was a FA, Jones(gone) FA, Muhammed,meh, FA, and two of their fine defensive players were FA.
Sorry, you were the one who said "equal parts".But you are welcome to your opinion.
I just disagree with that statement, I never said FA was not valuable.
I also believe TT didn't lowball Griffith, he took less to play in Oak beacuse of a coaching connection(I believe)(see also; Arrington,Vanderjadt). I doubt you know the actual contract details offered to many other FA's but don't doubt your dislike for TT.



Maybe we weren't in cap hell but we basically had no room to resign Wahle(without, I believe) several other players re-doing their contracts. JMO, wasn't gonna happen!
If we were so well off, why was TT forced to sign low grade FA's to try to fill holes? WE DIDN"T HAVE THE CAP SPACE!! I'm sure he much rather would have traded for a starting-type receiver instead of Taco Wallace, but he had no money to.

Oakland DID NOT release Moss. Please get the facts straight! They would have been responsible for part of his salary by releasing him. Until signed by another team, they were on the hook for his salary/signing bonus/whatever. Maybe we should just release KGB and Fergie to gain more cap space!!

We did have room to resign Wahle, TT just did not want too IMO. Its called structuring the deal. Give him a nice bonus upfront and prorate and also build in NLE Incentives against the cap in future years. OK I am not a GM but I had some adult beverages with an agent based here and it would shock you (it did me) on how many ways deals can be structured to fit even teams with tight cap

The reason he could not make a trade and sign Wallace instead was that the TRADING DEALINE PASSED. Also its very difficult to make a trade in the NFL unless both parties agree to restructure deal (see Randy Moss).

We have had cap space the last 2 years. That is a fact

You are correct. A mistake in terminology - it was a trade. They were looking for a trade to get something back for him (a draft pick). I could be wrong, but, I do not believe the effect on Oakland's salary cap would have been any different had they released him (as long as it was before the start of the season), or if they traded him. Once they would have released Moss, they didn't owe him his salary which was $10 Million for 2007. This is the same situation as us releasing Wahle - once we released him his roster bonus and salary came off of our cap. I did a lot of reading on the potential Moss deal, and, I am pretty sure what I have stated is correct. That is why there were some people that thought by "waiting out" Oakland, TT could get him without offering a draft pick at all.



You are correct. Our salary cap guru Brandt stated that Wahle's contract could have been redone to fit under the cap, and, in fact he was expecting to restructure it. He said, "that is what we do".

That is correct except that I am not sure in Wahle's case if there was any prorated signing bonus that would have counted against the cap.

I'm not of the position that signing Wahle was impossible, but we were tight against the cap that year. We haven't been the last two years, and a big reason why is that we haven't played games like Denver and San Fran have over the years.

Let's put it in perspective too. Rivera was too old to re-sign for large dollars (IMO), and Wahle was going to command LT money on the open market (which he received). TT was of the opinion that you don't have to give the big bucks to G's. We also had two good T's, and Flanagan hadn't really begun severely falling off yet (I believe he was coming off an injury). He gambled that he could find not one, but two serviceable players to plug in between the bookends and the anchor. We all know he wasn't successful in doing so that year, and the team suffered (that wasn't the sole reason that team went 4-12--the backfield and WR position was also decimated by injuries). That team was going to be a train wreck with or without Wahle, but not adequately replacing the G's that year was (IMO) the biggest mistake of his GB career.

He also didn't let the problem linger, and he (contrary to some rather vocal opinions) restocked the position well last offseason with not two, but three promising young players that all improved as the year went along after some pretty public growing pains. I expect you'll see further improvement (better technique, physical strength, increased comfort in the ZBS) this year.

One of a couple of qualities I see that Thompson shares with Wolf: don't let your mistakes linger (see Cory Rodgers as another example), and don't make decisions based on what certain segments of the fans want just because it's the easier, more expedient thing to do (Green for a further example). He's trying to build a football team, not win a popularity contest.

I still think he's doing a pretty good job, and I'd love to hear a single example of a GM that is correct 100% of the time.

The other point that is always left out when it comes to Whale, and to Green for that matter, is that they were in the drivers seat on negotiations. Whale had the Packers in a position where if he didn't get a renogotiated contract he wanted - the Packers had to release him. It wasn't as simple as TT just renegotiating to fit our cap needs. Something needed to be done and Whale would have been a fool to sign for cheap, why not force your way into Free Agency and see what your worth. If the Packers were going to keep Whale and not let him test the market, they needed to extend him the year before when they had leverage.

I think the same goes for Green, unless Green Bay knocked his socks off with a huge offer, why not test Free Agency.

That being said, I don't think that TT was or is going to pay top dollar for a Guard.

I think a lot of posters ignore that there are two parties involved and sometimes the player has the advantage and it's not in his best interest to sign early.

Antonio Freeman for example. He rolled the dice, turned down our extension overtures when he was a restricted FA, and ending up breaking the bank (and in hindsight it may have been better for us if he'd broken it elsewhere).