Is Ted Thompson this bad or was he never that good?

[{Family Ghost}]

11 hours ago, TheOnlyThing said:

"General manager Ted Thompson’s anachronistic approach to talent acquisition has left them exposed at one specific position or area of athleticism or facet of the game at the end of every season since the Packers won their 13th championship in February 2011."

LOL, so pretty much ignoring unrestricted free agency and never making trades for players = anachronistic.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2017/12/17/silverstein-packers-show-theyre-capable-teasing-but-not-contending/939547001/

I agree with the article .. we're not getting back to the bowl with this front office/coaching staff.  They caught lightning in a bottle in 2010, and can't seem to be able to get over the hump since.  They've been teasing us for 6 or 7 years since with a defense that is swiss cheese against quality qb's.  People will point to all of the playoff appearances, but I really think Aaron Rodgers is the one that deserves the most credit.  He's been bailing his team out for years.  Sure, McCarthy got a few wins without Rodgers, but it was against some of the worst teams in the NFL and they were nail biters to boot.

[Dubz41]

On 12/15/2017 at 9:45 PM, th87 said:

So then why were people so against tanking the season? 

Paraphrasing what Lomabardi said,   'Show me someone who is okay with losing and I'll show you a loser"

Even if it for a few games, its taking steps on a path to loserville. How has 'Suck for Luck' turned out.  The draft is a crapshoot and losing on purpose is no guarantee of better draft performance.

[AlexGreen#20]

13 hours ago, TheOnlyThing said:

"General manager Ted Thompson’s anachronistic approach to talent acquisition has left them exposed at one specific position or area of athleticism or facet of the game at the end of every season since the Packers won their 13th championship in February 2011."

LOL, so pretty much ignoring unrestricted free agency and never making trades for players = anachronistic.

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2017/12/17/silverstein-packers-show-theyre-capable-teasing-but-not-contending/939547001/

Can you define "Anachronistic" and then provide your take on why the word is inappropriate in this context?

[CWood21]

6 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Can you define "Anachronistic" and then provide your take on why the word is inappropriate in this context?

I'm still not even sure what his point is...

[TheOnlyThing]

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I'm still not even sure what his point is...

I'll get to Alex's question about the definition of "anachronistic" a bit later.

But first I'm still trying to locate all that compelling evidence you were going to provide (months ago) to prove your contention that "You look at [TT's] draft record and it stands up as well as anyone's."

Or has that project been abandoned now in light of all the evidence to the contrary (at least with respect to the drafts the past 7 years)? 

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said:

I'll get to Alex's question about the definition of "anachronistic" a bit later.

But first I'm still trying to locate all that compelling evidence you were going to provide (months ago) to prove your contention that "You look at [TT's] draft record and it stands up as well as anyone's."

Or has that project been abandoned now in light of all the evidence to the contrary (at least with respect to the drafts the past 7 years)? 

No.  You made up an entirely fictitious argument that NOBODY was making.  In fact, I agreed with you when I said that I thought that his drafts from 2011 until now weren't up to par.  Except you choose to use the 2011 until now discussion because it fits your narrative.  Nothing more, nothing less.

[spilltray]

2011 also gives you Sherrod, with only 2011-12-13 finished with their rookie deals, losing one to catastrophic injury skews things a bit.

[incognito_man]

38 minutes ago, spilltray said:

2011 also gives you Sherrod, with only 2011-12-13 finished with their rookie deals, losing one to catastrophic injury skews things a bit.

He continues to ignore the simple fact that GB had less draft capital than every other team over that time frame too.

Reality doesn't fit his narrative so he ignores it.

He should be ignored too.

[Green19]

Honestly Ted and his scouting staff are near the top in the league... and the league has confirm this. None of our coaches are successful but our personnel group has been. And consistently gets looked at.

Schneider, McKenize, Dorsey, soon to be Wolf and Ball. This illustrates how highly the NFL community views our personnel department. So I don’t really judge him hard over bad misses. Sure he had a dry spell in 2011-2013... the law of average would say he has to miss.

My biggest beef with Ted and honestly McCarthy is their personnel philosophy doesn’t match their defensive philosophy. The Pittsburgh defense is one for seasoned veterans and experience. Heck I remember the Steelers always drafting defensive players and everyone knew they wouldn’t start... because it takes time. Timmons was a poster child for this awhile back.

Given their personnel philosophy this was never going to work. Ted wants to keep the roster young. Plus the personnel department loves to have youth be the depth... when injuries come, you have players that are too young to understand the workings of the scheme and mistakes happens. Josh Jones is our poster child for this.

Ultimately I blame them both for not realizing this and putting their players and coaches in spots they don’t want to be and make them not successful. They either need to get a simple scheme that allows young players to be successful or they need to invest in veterans both veteran starters and veteran depth ( in the critical positions).

[LargeFarva]

1 hour ago, Green19 said:

Ultimately I blame them both for not realizing this and putting their players and coaches in spots they don’t want to be and make them not successful. They either need to get a simple scheme that allows young players to be successful or they need to invest in veterans both veteran starters and veteran depth ( in the critical positions).

Shields 2010. Hayward 2012. Clinton-Dix 2014. Randall and Rollins 2015. King 2017. All were rookies that were successful, and in Hayward's case highly successful (6 INTs, 2nd team All-Pro). If there's one area where rookies have played well it's in the "complex" secondary.

[AlexGreen#20]

15 hours ago, CWood21 said:

I'm still not even sure what his point is...

It means "old fashioned and outdated."

As in, Thompson's strategy made sense in the NFL in the days before Free Agency, but now that Free Agency is a thing, Thompson's strategy is behind the times. 

[Norm]

11 hours ago, incognito_man said:

He continues to ignore the simple fact that GB had less draft capital than every other team over that time frame too.

Reality doesn't fit his narrative so he ignores it.

He should be ignored too.

K

[incognito_man]

I still haven't figured out how to do that

[Green19]

9 hours ago, LargeFarva said:

Shields 2010. Hayward 2012. Clinton-Dix 2014. Randall and Rollins 2015. King 2017. All were rookies that were successful, and in Hayward's case highly successful (6 INTs, 2nd team All-Pro). If there's one area where rookies have played well it's in the "complex" secondary.

2010: Shields wasn’t the starter... Woodson and Tramon where. And Shield came on at the end of the year/playoffs. Wasn’t killing it from day one.

2012:  Again at most Casey was the 3rd CB Shields and Tramon were starters. And I think Casey has proven to show he was always going to be a ballhawk in this league.

2014: Haha didn’t start day one if I recall correctly. Plus Shields had a pro bowl year that year. Tramon was a Veteran CB starting, Hayward was a season 3rd at that point. Burnett was veteran running mate for Haha. He was in a bubble with established guys... and he honestly didn’t start coming on until late and the playoffs.

2015: one Rollins I wouldn’t say was anything special... he had a 2 pick game against Rams and showed he could hang and promise, wouldn’t go over board on that. Randall again had spots but was still not killing it game in game out. And this year peppers and Matthews had productive pro bowl years which help the secondary.

2017: King... again moments but I not going to say he knows this defense or is a player yet. 

My point is rookie can have success if the main workings are in place and the coaches put them in the spots they feel comfortable. Again look at the overall defenses production those years (not individuals). All those guys probably gave up stupid TDs too. Look at Josh Jones this year... probably our best defenseman when it’s just “playing”... was rendered a massive liability because he doesn’t know his assignment down in and down out. Which is fine if everyone else is killing... but they aren’t because they are doing the same things.

[LacyIsGood]

11 hours ago, Green19 said:

Honestly Ted and his scouting staff are near the top in the league... and the league has confirm this. None of our coaches are successful but our personnel group has been. And consistently gets looked at.

Schneider, McKenize, Dorsey, soon to be Wolf and Ball. This illustrates how highly the NFL community views our personnel department. So I don’t really judge him hard over bad misses. Sure he had a dry spell in 2011-2013... the law of average would say he has to miss.

My biggest beef with Ted and honestly McCarthy is their personnel philosophy doesn’t match their defensive philosophy. The Pittsburgh defense is one for seasoned veterans and experience. Heck I remember the Steelers always drafting defensive players and everyone knew they wouldn’t start... because it takes time. Timmons was a poster child for this awhile back.

Given their personnel philosophy this was never going to work. Ted wants to keep the roster young. Plus the personnel department loves to have youth be the depth... when injuries come, you have players that are too young to understand the workings of the scheme and mistakes happens. Josh Jones is our poster child for this.

Ultimately I blame them both for not realizing this and putting their players and coaches in spots they don’t want to be and make them not successful. They either need to get a simple scheme that allows young players to be successful or they need to invest in veterans both veteran starters and veteran depth ( in the critical positions).

I totally agree with this.  Ted has been generally great.  The coaches are no longer getting enough out of the talent, and sadly it doesn't look like they've tried to change much at all in years.  That's an eternity in the NFL.  It's bad news, and lazy. Move on...