Jump to content

Defense Discussion [2017]


CentralFC

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

That's not really the issue I was getting at.  Being critical of a way a FO works isn't trolling, it's just being critical.  Instead of calling him a troll, point out how his version of events isn't accurate.  The Packers only had X amount of cap space that offseason, and they needed Y to sign all of those free agents.

Every time a troll a trolls it is not my job to point out the FACTS, if they can troll on here that is up to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CWood21 said:

He's NOT trolling...I don't know how many times I have to say that.

Ignoring facts postign made up BS. Does TT sit on his hands and never ever sign FAs? I am asking you because I am worried you are like him. Do you ignore reality as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, PackyAttacky said:

Ignoring facts postign made up BS. Does TT sit on his hands and never ever sign FAs? I am asking you because I am worried you are like him. Do you ignore reality as well?

Stick to discussing football.  If you have questions about forum moderation, feel free to PM me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PackyAttacky said:

So you didn't answer the quesiton, did he make up BS or not? Does TT sign any FAs ever? These are simple questions to answer.

Rather than going to an extreme, how about asking him to clarify himself?  And prior to this past offseason, there was a very legitimate argument that TT didn't utilize FA to his potential.  Would you say that's an incorrect statement?  The Packers are almost always one of the least active teams in FA, and there's enough reason to believe that some of those FA stopgaps that the Packers have passed on over the years could have helped their defense.  That's not a stretch by any imagination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Rather than going to an extreme, how about asking him to clarify himself?  And prior to this past offseason, there was a very legitimate argument that TT didn't utilize FA to his potential.  Would you say that's an incorrect statement?  The Packers are almost always one of the least active teams in FA, and there's enough reason to believe that some of those FA stopgaps that the Packers have passed on over the years could have helped their defense.  That's not a stretch by any imagination.

But we are still ACTIVE, or in yours and his fantasy LALA land world do Peppers, Pickett, Woodson, Guion , Saturday and other dont count? We also have NEVER had a ton of money to spend as is a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PackyAttacky said:

But we are still ACTIVE, or in yours and his fantasy LALA land world do Peppers, Pickett, Woodson, Guion , Saturday and other dont count? We also have NEVER had a ton of money to spend as is a problem.

This is the last time I'm going to ask you, discuss football and not posters.

Let me ask you this again, in terms of activity in FA where do you think the Packers rank?  Would you say they're near the most active, middle of the pack, or least active teams in terms of adding FA?

EDIT: And before you continue painting me in this light, just note that I've never said he was right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Packy is my protege lol.

My issue is always they think we can sign whoever anyone else did. Money is an issue. Not anyone will come here. Someone was mad the other day we didn't get Maclin. C'mon. Not everyone wants to sign here for other reasons. Then they only point at guys that ended up panning out even though they wanted plenty of guys we were gone FA busts. If TT had the hindsight we do... Guess what he'd sign those guys too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, PackyAttacky said:

He said TT sits on his hands as in zero zlich nada, TT gets enough as this team is always competitive.

That's my issue. We're always a pretty good team. Perfect? Of course not. Excluding maybe NE who else is this consistent with no dips. That's gotta be good right. But obviously with hindsight you can always do way better. I doubt a GM on Earth would please these guys.

Which isn't to say they never have a good point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, PackyAttacky said:

He said TT sits on his hands as in zero zlich nada, TT gets enough as this team is always competitive.

What's more likely, that you overreacted and took his words entirely way too literally or that he truly believes that Ted does nothing in FA that could easily be refuted by facts?  Given the fact that you tried to paint me in as extreme of a light despite not knowing my stance, I'd probably believe it's the former.  But I'm willing to let you explain yourself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NormSizedMidget said:

That's my issue. We're always a pretty good team. Perfect? Of course not. Excluding maybe NE who else is this consistent with no dips. That's gotta be good right. But obviously with hindsight you can always do way better. I doubt a GM on Earth would please these guys.

Which isn't to say they never have a good point.

That wasn't the argument Norm.  I don't think there's anyone who think that the Packers/Ted/Dom are without complaints.  The problem is we're seeing arguments being painted in the most extreme way in order to make a point, despite that being a very inaccurate stance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CWood21 said:

That wasn't the argument Norm.  I don't think there's anyone who think that the Packers/Ted/Dom are without complaints.  The problem is we're seeing arguments being painted in the most extreme way in order to make a point, despite that being a very inaccurate stance.

My first point addressed the points then I was just rambling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...