Ted Thompson is a complete Idiot

Mags

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 8, 2000
2,813
27
48
As it is, Favre is 39 and isn't near the QB he once was.

Now THAT logic is asinine....

Ummm.... correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Favre:

The starting QB for the NFC in the Pro bowl in 2007? 2nd in MVP voting in 2007?

On the roster for the AFC in the Pro Bowl in 2008?

In my book, still getting voted to the Pro Bowl still says something - he's still pretty darned good.

I don't think Aaron Rodgers will be in the Pro Bowl this year????
 

Mags

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 8, 2000
2,813
27
48
You can print that after any of his posts.

YYZ - I don't get it - I don't get personal. You are always attacking people if you don't like what they say (not just my posts, but you have been doing it for years to other people).

You have the right to disagree - but your childish behavior, and bashing, I thought, was not allowed by Jack.

Stick to the issues, and skip the personal attacks. I've seen pictures of you, and you ain't big enough to see this through. And frankly, I don't have the time or patience for it.

It was clear based on year long comments by the media, and the fan poll on ESPN last night, that the majority of the country feels the same way I do - that the Packers would have been a better team with Favre this year.

The "Favre" poll won by a greater margin that Obama did!

So, if your intention is to just heap personal insults, then, please stay out of my thread.
 

yyz

Under .500
Forum Member
Mar 16, 2000
43,208
2,189
113
On the course!
Hike up your skirt, drama queen.

You wanna yell, "I told you so!" all the time, and have the balls to get mad when someone thinks you're being a little too much?

I'll try to be more sensitive to your needs.
 

Mags

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 8, 2000
2,813
27
48
As always, your response has a personal attack slant in it. Typical.

Like I said, just stay out of my threads. Your personal attacks really don't add anything of merit to my threads, or anyone else's for that matter.
 

Jackal

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 22, 2001
97
0
0
Would the Packers have had a better record this year with Favre at the helm? I think that is a simple yes, just because of experience and Rogers inability thus far to have posted a comeback win... But, bottom line is the defense and special teams failed the Pack. Not Aaron Rodgers, he had a very good year numbers wise. With Brett, I would fathom at BEST instead of 5-10, make em 9-7 if you want, still not good enough for the playoffs. But more realistically like 8-8. What is key to this team, is last year they were not a 13-3 team, just like this year, they are not a 5-10 team. This is an 8-8 to 9-7 team and then the difference in 13-3 or 5-10 is how the ball bounces. Like last night. Fluke bounce on the punt. Dropped pick six for Collins. Missed FG, blocked FG. Brett nor Aaron make the difference there. But a D that can actually stop someone, or a special teams coach that can teach lane assigments, injuries to D Line and LB's and Safety, couple bounces here and there... Those are the key differences between last year and this. Not who was taking the snaps. I believe Brett would have been better for them one more year, but, even that would not have been enough.
 

Mags

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 8, 2000
2,813
27
48
Have you looked at the TITLE of your thread?????????

I thought the bashing rules only applied to forum members.

The last I looked, Ted Thompson is not a member of MJ's ...

OR

Maybe that is who Beantown Jim really is.....
 

yyz

Under .500
Forum Member
Mar 16, 2000
43,208
2,189
113
On the course!
Would the Packers have had a better record this year with Favre at the helm? I think that is a simple yes, just because of experience and Rogers inability thus far to have posted a comeback win... But, bottom line is the defense and special teams failed the Pack. Not Aaron Rodgers, he had a very good year numbers wise. With Brett, I would fathom at BEST instead of 5-10, make em 9-7 if you want, still not good enough for the playoffs. But more realistically like 8-8. What is key to this team, is last year they were not a 13-3 team, just like this year, they are not a 5-10 team. This is an 8-8 to 9-7 team and then the difference in 13-3 or 5-10 is how the ball bounces. Like last night. Fluke bounce on the punt. Dropped pick six for Collins. Missed FG, blocked FG. Brett nor Aaron make the difference there. But a D that can actually stop someone, or a special teams coach that can teach lane assigments, injuries to D Line and LB's and Safety, couple bounces here and there... Those are the key differences between last year and this. Not who was taking the snaps. I believe Brett would have been better for them one more year, but, even that would not have been enough.


Very good post. Yet, the record determines where a team stands. Look at poor San Diego! Fighting next week for a playoff spot, when they should have had it wrapped up TWO WEEKS ago, based on what happend in weeks 1 and 2!

Green Bay was handed 3...maybe 4 wins last year that cannot be denied by ANYONE. But, it is what it is. You don't apologize for those wins or give them back.

Could Favre have won more games than Rodgers this season? Maybe so! I'm just not silly enough to sit here and say "absolutely"!

I wish we could plug him in like a video game, and end the controversy.
 

MadJack

Administrator
Staff member
Forum Admin
Super Moderators
Channel Owner
Jul 13, 1999
105,403
1,724
113
70
home
I just don't think, when coming off a 13-3 year, that you give away a QB coming off a Pro Bowl season, who is one of the best of all time, to give the job to basically a rookie.

i thought he quit/retired? :shrug:

if my employee comes to me and quits, it's :sadwave: right now. you don't have to give me a week's notice either. I don't want it! don't let the door hit you in the ass.

i wouldn't have brought him back either.

:sadwave:
 

jng

Packer Fan
Forum Member
Nov 15, 2000
1,749
90
48
The price of oil has plummeted since Favre left, too. Unemployment is at a near all-time high......businesses are shutting down......let's not even talk about the stock market!

It's unreal the effect he's had on the nation's economy!

I wondered what the hell happened. I've noticed more frogs getting sick and dying since Favre left Green Bay, too.

Rodgers is solid and may actually be great with a good offensive line in front of him. The OL and DL need to be revamped, cap space needs to be used. The Pack will be back next year. And . . . How the hell do you hate Brett Favre???

J
 

baby johnson

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 12, 2001
5,530
81
48
71
dicken's cider, wisconsin
i loved farve, but he is mopped as of now

his best days are long over and he has looked simply average the last few years

he's slower, dumber and not as resilient to cold weather as he was years back

and he has proven to be a just so so in post season
 

bleedingpurple

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 23, 2008
22,412
238
63
52
Where it is real F ing COLD
I won't get into the Favre debate... I would of kept him but don't blame them for getting rid of him... I will say Ted Thompson is an IDIOT though.. '

1. Trading away Corey Williams for a #2 pick...

2. Drafting Jordy Nelson. (may turn out good but geez a wr was a not a need)

3. Not addressing OL at all..

4. Having a 13 - 3 team and really doing absolutely nothing to improve the team for this year..

Maybe he has a big plan for this off season? :shrug:
 

Mags

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 8, 2000
2,813
27
48
i thought he quit/retired? :shrug:

if my employee comes to me and quits, it's :sadwave: right now. you don't have to give me a week's notice either. I don't want it! don't let the door hit you in the ass.

i wouldn't have brought him back either.

:sadwave:

Jack:

Normally I'd agree with this approach, but....

1. Everything I read, the Packers forced Brett to make a decision before he was ready - so it was like, fine, I retire. If given the proper time (in Brett's mind at least), he very likely would have never retired.

2. When you run a business, and IF you are accountable to the bottom line of the business (which obviously TT is not), you do not let the an employee of this magnitude go.

Favre was 2nd in MVP voting in 2007. Which is the same thing in many ways of saying he was the 2nd best player in the business in 2007.

That "employee" was largely responsible for 13-3 last year.

That same team this year is 5-10 - mostly because they did not have a game tested replacement.

Show me a fortune 500 company that fires the 2nd best worker in their industry and replaces him with a rookie? And then has the predictible collapse in their business as the Packers did.

The Packers being 5-10 this year is no surprise to many of us in Packer Country. Most thought with Favre this year we'd probably be 10-6 or 11-5, due to the more difficult schedule.

With Rodgers, most people predicted 8-8 or so - and it has been even worse, due to other TT issues - which have been detailed above. Believe it or not, our punter even costs us games - when TT waived the dependable Jon Ryan 3 days before the season started for the bumb Scott Frost - who they finally waived 3 weeks ago (without even having a replacement yet - he was that bad).

In real business, TT would be canned immediately for destroying a profitable business and losing the 2nd best employee in the business (as of 2007).

But in the NFL - well, they certainly do not worry about running their teams like a business. Which is why GB has one of the lowest total salaries in the NFL (well below the cap), but a season ticketholder waiting list that is like 30 years long.

The revenue comes in and it really doesn't matter about the product of the field.

When it comes to TT, it is not all about the Packers, it is all about TT's ego.

Which is why that dumba** should be canned ASAP.
 

rusty

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 24, 2006
4,627
11
0
Under a mask.
The Packers have more problems then QB this year.This thread gets so much replys because (IMO)your comparing a out of retirement veteran vs a future pro bowler(easily). Hes a rookie for crying out loud!!

I have no Faith in Farve this weekend.None.He makes me kringe everytime he throws.
The arguement in my eyes is not whos better ,its whos next in line.Mags,you keep driving home the 13-3 issue??I dont get it.One person doest make or break a season.Look at NE(sorry,but its true:shrug: ).

They lost there QB,there RB,there linebacker(s),theresafety,there defensive end,the list goes on and on.But there still in it on the last week.
What im trying to say is this.

GBS problems run deeper than QB,its called depth of there roster.Grant ,althou not injured could not
get job done,but they had nowhere else to turn(plus there O-line is ok at best).

There D played banged up all year and could not plug in relpacements that were good enough.
Bottom line is they were good at WRS and QB,but awful everywhere else.

Be patient thou I think there gonna be just fine sooner than later.
 

rusty

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 24, 2006
4,627
11
0
Under a mask.
Jack:

Normally I'd agree with this approach, but....

1. Everything I read, the Packers forced Brett to make a decision before he was ready - so it was like, fine, I retire. If given the proper time (in Brett's mind at least), he very likely would have never retired.

2. When you run a business, and IF you are accountable to the bottom line of the business (which obviously TT is not), you do not let the an employee of this magnitude go.

Favre was 2nd in MVP voting in 2007. Which is the same thing in many ways of saying he was the 2nd best player in the business in 2007.

That "employee" was largely responsible for 13-3 last year.

That same team this year is 5-10 - mostly because they did not have a game tested replacement.

Show me a fortune 500 company that fires the 2nd best worker in their industry and replaces him with a rookie? And then has the predictible collapse in their business as the Packers did.

The Packers being 5-10 this year is no surprise to many of us in Packer Country. Most thought with Favre this year we'd probably be 10-6 or 11-5, due to the more difficult schedule.

With Rodgers, most people predicted 8-8 or so - and it has been even worse, due to other TT issues - which have been detailed above. Believe it or not, our punter even costs us games - when TT waived the dependable Jon Ryan 3 days before the season started for the bumb Scott Frost - who they finally waived 3 weeks ago (without even having a replacement yet - he was that bad).

In real business, TT would be canned immediately for destroying a profitable business and losing the 2nd best employee in the business (as of 2007).

But in the NFL - well, they certainly do not worry about running their teams like a business. Which is why GB has one of the lowest total salaries in the NFL (well below the cap), but a season ticketholder waiting list that is like 30 years long.

The revenue comes in and it really doesn't matter about the product of the field.

When it comes to TT, it is not all about the Packers, it is all about TT's ego.

Which is why that dumba** should be canned ASAP.

OK Mags ,ill agree with some of your issues.However your so caught up with TT ,that the Farve issue althou minor is the driving force behind your anger.

Id be more concerned on how Im gonna draft and spend in free agency,then whos QBing my team as you already HAVE A QB,but your just not thinking correctly.

Its time to get off the Farve thing and look forward.Who we drafting,free agency,possibly trading.......etc those are the real issues!

GL!
 

Mags

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 8, 2000
2,813
27
48
OK Mags ,ill agree with some of your issues.However your so caught up with TT ,that the Farve issue althou minor is the driving force behind your anger.

Id be more concerned on how Im gonna draft and spend in free agency,then whos QBing my team as you already HAVE A QB,but your just not thinking correctly.

Its time to get off the Farve thing and look forward.Who we drafting,free agency,possibly trading.......etc those are the real issues!

GL!

Rusty:

I realize you don't follow the Packers. But you are way off base on a couple of issues.

1. The Packers had 0 running game last year, until Grant came on in week 8. ZERO. Yet they won games behind Favre and the passing game.
2. Grant in 2008 has 1100 yards and is 9th in the NFL in rushing yards. It's not like he's had a bad season. He ranks ahead of such players as Frank Gore, Tomlinson, Brandon Jacobs and Westbrook.

So actually, for the entire season, Rodgers has benefited from a MUCH better running game than last season. Look in up last year in the 1st 7 games - you'll be amazed.

Rodgers is easily a Pro-Bowler? Not so fast, young one. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel just had a survey of NFL scouts in an article last week. It was felt that Rodgers was the 19th best QB in the league. Opinions were mixed at best regarding his future - some scouts said this is the best he will get and has no more upside, other scouts liked his upside.

Rodgers is no lock to ever get in the Pro Bowl, much less win an MVP (or 2 or 3 MVPs). He is not a 22 year old rookie who will continue to mature - he is already 25 years old.

It takes a special type of quarterback to bring your team from behind late in the 4th quarter. That's why they made such a big deal about Elway's 4th quarter comebacks. And possibly why Rodgers is 0-8 in 4th quarter comebacks (although admittedly Monday's debacle can't be put on Aaron's shoulders).

I thought you may be interested in what the scouts (who probably know a lot more than you or I) think about Rodgers performance and potential. Below is the Journal Sentinel article I referenced. As you can see from the comments and comparisons, the scouts do NOT think all the highly of him currently.

Keep in mind this is in the Miwaukee paper - so any article you would think would be biased toward Rogers and the Packers, not against them.




Grade point
Taking a look at how Rodgers rates

Posted: Dec. 20, 2008

Chicago - At this point in his fledgling career, Aaron Rodgers of the Green Bay Packers rates as the 19th-best quarterback in the National Football League.

That was the conclusion last week in a survey of four executives in personnel for other NFL teams, including two from the AFC and two from the NFC. Each of them has been a scout in the NFL for at least 10 years.

Undoubtedly, some of the Packers' coaches and scouts would argue that Rodgers should be ranked higher. General manager Ted Thompson gave Rodgers a five-year extension worth $63.52 million in new money ($20 million guaranteed) after his seventh start, saying he didn't even need that long to make his evaluation.

If there was ever any doubt that Rodgers was Thompson's guy, there could be none after that statement.

Although the four personnel men have never coached Rodgers or worked for the Packers during Rodgers' four-year career, they are more than qualified to make such a judgment. Three work for teams that played Green Bay this season, meaning they had to break down many games of the Packers'. And, as a general rule, they scan through every NFL game every week.

To start, 21 backup quarterbacks with legitimate ability were identified to go with the other 31 starters. Then each of the scouts was asked whether they would take Rodgers in comparison to those 52 players. There were no qualifiers other than injured players were considered healthy; the scouts seemed to make their choices on the basis of winning now.

Twelve quarterbacks were chosen over Rodgers by a 4-0 vote: Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Jay Cutler, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, Tony Romo, Carson Palmer, Matt Ryan, Donovan McNabb, Philip Rivers and Kurt Warner.

Three were chosen over Rodgers by a 3-1 margin: Brett Favre, Jake Delhomme and Vince Young.

Three finished in a 2-2 tie with Rodgers: Jason Campbell, Chad Pennington and Jeff Garcia.

Nine finished behind Rodgers by a 3-1 margin: Joe Flacco, David Garrard, Matt Schaub, Trent Edwards, Kyle Orton, Matt Leinart, JaMarcus Russell, Sage Rosenfels and Daunte Culpepper.

Rodgers won by 4-0 over the other 25.

Two scouts ranked Rodgers No. 21, a third ranked him No. 20 and the fourth ranked him No. 14. The average was No. 19.

Entering the week, Rodgers was tied for eighth in passer rating at 91.8. His predecessor, Favre, ranked 15th at 86.5.

Here are excerpts from the interviews followed by my comment:

"It's hard to follow a legend. I think he's played well. He's not a rookie but he's not much more than a rookie, in my mind. He's shown a lot of ability. Mike (McCarthy) is a good offensive coach and is part of the reason Aaron's had success. I don't think he's the reason they're losing." - NFC scout

Based on Rodgers' first two training camps, it was beginning to look like he might turn out to be another Rich Campbell. He has come a long, long way.

"All those guys behind Favre moved on and had success. That's your measuring stick right there. Pretty good group." - NFC scout

Mark Brunell, Matt Hasselbeck, Aaron Brooks, even Ty Detmer had excellent careers based on where they were drafted. All learned from Favre, as did Rodgers.

"The biggest concern going in was the durability. He has managed to hang in and take some hits. He doesn't play as big as he is. His frame doesn't look like he's 218. Naturally, he's probably a 190 guy. I don't think there was ever a doubt on his toughness. It's just that he was so fragile." - AFC scout

This scout predicted in the second week of September that Rodgers wouldn't last more than eight games. Rodgers allayed some fears about his durability by playing through a sprained right shoulder. That was highly impressive.

"His arm is OK. It's good enough to make all the throws, but it's not anything special." - AFC scout

After evaluating Rodgers coming out of California, former St. Louis coach Mike Martz listed arm strength as his top concern, followed by the ability to read a defense, react and go through a progression. "I could be wrong about both," Martz said in December 2005. He probably was. With increased overall strength and a less rigid delivery, Rodgers now has a good arm.

"He hasn't given them the ability to get rid of the ball quick to help his protection." - NFC scout

Rodgers has been at fault for seven of the 30 sacks (23.3%). In 18 games last season, Favre was responsible for three of his 16 sacks (18.8%). Rodgers did hold the ball too long early; six of his seven were in the first nine games. He has been much better of late.

"He has some feel for escaping stuff. He has some ability to create. But he's not somebody that you're scared of when he pulls the ball down." - AFC scout

Rodgers has rushed 53 times for 214 yards, a 4.0-yard average, and four touchdowns. Favre's best rushing season was 1993 with 216 yards. Favre had 154 yards and one touchdown in his last five years.

"Best in the NFC North? Maybe. It's not even close to being etched in stone. You put him and (Kyle) Orton before he got hurt, their numbers were somewhat similar. And (Tarvaris) Jackson has really been looking good." - NFC scout

Agreed. Orton was doing a lot with a lesser supporting cast before his ankle injury. And Jackson does have a ton of ability.

"I don't know how much of a big-play guy he is. And I don't know that he can put stuff together when you need it as opposed to accumulating stats. To me, the key is whether a guy can go out and win a game. He hasn't done that. Even Favre, as a young guy, he'd (mess) stuff up, but when it came down to the end he'd find a way. Like Steve McNair, he may play awful but would make plays when they needed to win the game. Even Vince Young is 18-11 as a starter." - AFC scout

Rodgers had chances in the last few minutes to win six games: Tampa Bay, Tennessee, at Minnesota, Carolina, Houston and Jacksonville. He's 0-6. It's the big, black blot on his season.

"I just don't see him being able to take those guys and say, 'All right, we're going to score.' It's the intangible things you have to look at with this guy. And how many guys do you know just become a leader? They don't just become one." ? NFC scout

The departures of Favre and Rob Davis left the Packers almost bankrupt of leadership. Rodgers is 25. Hard to say what he might be like at 28 or 30.

"He's got the confidence of a great player without being a great player. Aaron's a little bit like Jay Cutler, but Cutler's a (jerk). Aaron would be that cocky fraternity guy in college that you just want to smack upside the head sometimes." - AFC scout

Rodgers, with a 35 on the Wonderlic intelligence test, is the smartest guy in many rooms. In his first two seasons, he did come across as somewhat arrogant. But he learned from Favre what teammates want from their quarterback. Can Rodgers be hard to coach? Perhaps.

"The first two years it was questionable whether he'd ever play a snap in the league. I think he's maxed out. I just think whatever you have right now is what he will be. He may not lose games, which certainly isn't a bad thing, but I don't think they ever will win games because of him." - AFC scout

How many good NFL quarterbacks didn't have a Division I offer out of high school and had to play one year at a junior college? In October 2005, the late Bill Walsh echoed this when he said: "What you see is what you get. He doesn't have great more potential that doesn't show. He's part of a system and a real outstanding coach in college and all of that. I don't know where it's going to take him."

"I'm not sure there is a ceiling on him. . .  outside of the intangible factors. I mean, he can do everything. Athletically? There's no ceiling. And he's only been a starter for one year." - NFC scout

Not only is Rodgers athletic, he is driven to succeed. His background indicates that.

"He had so much success early in the year. I didn't think he would be able to see the field but he did a very good job going away from his No. 1 receiver. Then he got the big contract. Did he think he arrived when he got the contract? I don't know." ? AFC scout

Before being handed millions, Rodgers' passer rating was 98.8 and the team was 4-3. Since then, his rating is 85.5 and the team is 1-6. Unless you've had a seven- eight-figure bank account, no one can say what it's like.

"They gave him all that money after how many weeks? Would you give it to him today? I'm not so sure outside of trying to prove what you did was right. He hasn't played up to that money right now." ? NFC scout

No one knew what Rodgers would do this season. No one in the league was under greater scrutiny.

Everyone, including these scouts, is kidding themselves if they try to draw a bead on Rodgers. He will need at least 25 starts to start doing that.

Right now, he's No. 19. Could he become a top-10? Yes. Could he move among the top five? Maybe.

So far, so good. The Packers have a legitimate starting quarterback. But this is only the beginning of a long process they can only hope ends well.
 

Mags

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 8, 2000
2,813
27
48
OK Mags ,ill agree with some of your issues.However your so caught up with TT ,that the Farve issue althou minor is the driving force behind your anger.

Id be more concerned on how Im gonna draft and spend in free agency,then whos QBing my team as you already HAVE A QB,but your just not thinking correctly.

Its time to get off the Farve thing and look forward.Who we drafting,free agency,possibly trading.......etc those are the real issues!

GL!

I'm not convinced we have a QB - see the article that I posted below. Most of the comments view Rodgers as a below average starting QB, with not much room to grow and litte upside.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top