Ted Thompson to transition into a new role within the organization. GB will begin a search for a new GM.

[Pugger]

25 minutes ago, cannondale said:

Most interesting part of the news conference for me was that MM would be involved in the GM search in some capacity. I always wondered from the start of this if Murphy and MM met and jointly game planned what needed to be done. It's interesting. 

Overall, I thought MM brought it. Pretty strong. He knows what he's doing.

I've never had a problem with MM as our HC....except when he throws out his red hankie....   

[Mazrimiv]

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

It was a BS blurb, you said it yourself, why are you dwelling on it?

It would be like someone asking me what space travel all entails and I say "Well you get in a rocket, leave the Earth's atmosphere and travel through the solar system." Well no .... Haha. Someone who doesn't really know anything about those guys wrote that blurb using the generic talk we hear about them.

Hardly dwelling on it.  I'm simply curious whether anyone is aware of moves made by GB that have been attributed to Elliot.  Based on comments made when Highsmith left, he was apparently the one who pushed for Shields and Tramon.  Those were a couple very nice calls.

[Packerraymond]

4 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

Hardly dwelling on it.  I'm simply curious whether anyone is aware of moves made by GB that have been attributed to Elliot.  Based on comments made when Highsmith left, he was apparently the one who pushed for Shields and Tramon.  Those were a couple very nice calls.

The three being interviewed have their hands in everything. Only players you can confidently attribute to any member of the FO are draft picks to the area scout where they were taken from.

No one has any idea what Gute, Wolf, Highsmith or Ball have led the charge for.

[Mazrimiv]

I read multiple reports of Elliot playing a large role in GB's botched attempt to trade Sitton, assuming there would be a market for him on the last day of cuts when there wasn't.  

[Norm]

8 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

The three being interviewed have their hands in everything. Only players you can confidently attribute to any member of the FO are draft picks to the area scout where they were taken from.

No one has any idea what Gute, Wolf, Highsmith or Ball have led the charge for.

Tramon said that Highsmith want hard for him. That counts for something, yeah?

[CWood21]

15 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

I read multiple reports of Elliot playing a large role in GB's botched attempt to trade Sitton, assuming there would be a market for him on the last day of cuts when there wasn't.  

To be fair, Josh Sitton's agent is the one to blame for that.  Once they leaked that they were going to release him if there wasn't an acceptable trade offer, his value was non-existent.

[MaryTsraining3s]

I truly think Ball would be the best option for the job and the closest thing to TT that isn't the white wizard himself, but I think a lot of us, including myself, want to see "mixing it up" per say. And I think that means mainly in the way these GMs attack free agency. Who knows, maybe Ball will be aggressive. The only reason I have that he wouldn't be is how the media is saying he's very close/same fashion as TT. There was a really good article about him written I believe last year, and one interesting tidbit was that an agent said Ball ALWAYS starts with a low ball offer. Also that he treats it like its his own personal money. From a saving money perspective, this is tremendous. From a reeling in a big free agent perspective, not sure its the most effective. Just shedding some light on the situation at hand. 

[Acrid Josher]

One of the areas where teams can still win big is on draft day trades. Many GMs still use the crazy outdated and unsupported Jimmy Johnson Draft Value Chart for their decisions despite several studies that have shown the chart to be highly flawed in certain parts. I want a GM who understands this and tries to aggressively exploit the teams that don't.

I don't know who that might be. I want to say that guys from the scouting side are more likely to fall in love with a guy and not be up on that kind of data, while a guy from the management/optimization side would be more likely to research and develop a more data driven approach. Then again in our case Ball is the oldest of the three main internal guys, so it's possible he'd be more likely to use the idea from the early 90s, while the younger guys might be more open to newer evidence. I can't say for sure but imo this is an underrated area because more and more teams are very competitive with each other in cap management, not overpaying for FAs, and other roster-building strategies that gave the Packers an edge 5-10 years ago. Whoever is in charged needs to be able to find and exploit the few remaining edges like this in the business (as well as develop their own new techniques).

[skibrett15]

8 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

To be fair, Josh Sitton's agent is the one to blame for that.  Once they leaked that they were going to release him if there wasn't an acceptable trade offer, his value was non-existent.

Seems like the error was that they let Sitton's agent know that they would release him.  Message should be to the agent "we're going to shop him so stand by"  "If we don't get an offer we like, we'd love to have Josh for 2015"

[Mr. Fussnputz]

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Maybe there was a misunderstanding, but the notion that some change was needed is debatable.  The "change for the sake of change" mentality was one that I (and others) took exception to.  The Packers had been one of the most successful franchises in the NFL, and aside from the Patriots you could make the argument that the Packers were the model franchise in the NFL.  I struggled to follow a plan without any conscious train of thought, which is generally why newer posters tend to struggle in adjusting to these forums.  FF strives for a higher level of discussion rather than just putting out opinions and not having to support your argument.

As for my stance on this, I think I'll wait until the dust settles before I make any opinion.  For all that we know, we might just end up with the same pieces to the puzzle in place just rearranged.  IF we hire Joe Philbin as OC, Darren Perry as DC, and Elliot Wolf as our GM, how much has really changed?  Would that change be the same if we hired John DeFilippo as OC, Vic Fangio as DC, and Doug Whaley as GM?  There's still way too many variables in play to know if we're better off, or worse off.  All my original point about not "burning the house down" was that you needed to weigh the very real risk that the Packers could end up in a worse situation, a stance that many at that time refuse to even acknowledge.  There's risk to this, and that's something I wanted those who were advocating tearing the franchise down to recognize.  I have no issue you with anyone wanting substantial change, but you have to be willing to accept those risks.

Fair enough. I just would like to clear one thing up. I can't speak for others, but I would never argue change just for the sake of change. I honestly felt back then already that the Packers, as an organization, had become stale and complacent in both their draft and develop philosophy, and their offensive and defensive schemes. I've had a chance to watch institutional staleness develop in several contexts, and the warning signs were there. I'll draft and develop as an example.  When TT came in he had great initial success with his draft and develop system. They even won a Super Bowl! One way staleness begins is oddly enough through success. If it worked, why change it? Unfortunately nothing works forever. The context changes. In this case, the salary cap grew, and cap  management became more sophisticated. At the same time the Packers' on field success pushed them down the draft board. TT's draft and development model needed to be updated to accommodate these changes. Better salary cap management processes opened the door for free agent signings, and even trades, but TT preferred to hold on to his draft choices, even protecting his compensatory ones by not signing FAs. So even though he started off with some impact FA signings (Pickett and Woodson) he did little after that, even when gaping holes, like safety, remained for years. So IMHO things got stale there and the Packer's roster suffered. 

It should be fascinating to see how this all plays out. I have no evidence, but I strongly suspect that there are/were things going on behind the scenes that led to this. Selective firings of assistant coaches after MM made his comments about patterns of negativity is some evidence that there may have been some sort of rift in the coaching staff over some issue we are not privy to. Firings on both sides of the ball suggest to me that the issue was greater than just offensive or defensive philosophy. I also think the TT thing is a separate issue having to do with cognitive decline and aging. Peace.

[Shanedorf]

1 hour ago, Acrid Josher said:

One of the areas where teams can still win big is on draft day trades. Many GMs still use the crazy outdated and unsupported Jimmy Johnson Draft Value Chart for their decisions despite several studies that have shown the chart to be highly flawed in certain parts. I want a GM who understands this and tries to aggressively exploit the teams that don't.

 

Back on the old site, Palmy mentioned that every NFL team has a guy dedicated to up front work on trades and communication with other teams. He also noted that the fraternity of scouts/personnel people kind of police things to make sure everything is on the up and up.

If you look at recent drafts, are there examples of some teams getting over on other teams ? ( I genuinely don't know)

Are there lopsided opportunities to be had with certain desperate trade partners ?

Packers traded up for Hayward and Spriggs in the 2nd, traded up for Burnett in the 3rd, traded up for Matthews in the 1st, traded back for King and Biegel

How did GB do on those trades vs an updated value chart ?

[packfanfb]

So MM is involved in picking his boss? Lol, what kind of charade they runnin' over there? Just announce Ball and end this clownfest already.

[{Family Ghost}]

On 1/1/2018 at 6:29 PM, Packerraymond said:

Wolf has been preparing for this since he was a teen. I mean his last name helps, but any young guy who was actively in scouting for that long would excite us. I just hope it's him. Chance for another decade + run if he pans out at his age.

Maybe he winds up getting his GM training somewhere else and we end up seeing him return in several years when Ball is ready to step down.

[{Family Ghost}]

10 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

So MM is involved in picking his boss? Lol, what kind of charade they runnin' over there? Just announce Ball and end this clownfest already.

It is pretty obvious that Ball is getting that gig.  Only thing that could change it will be if one of the candidates knocks it out of the park and just wows Murphy and McCarthy.  I get why Thompson is trying to appear to be staying out of it ... doesn't want that angry call from Ron Wolf when his kid gets passed over. 

[OneTwoSixFive]

2 hours ago, Acrid Josher said:

One of the areas where teams can still win big is on draft day trades. Many GMs still use the crazy outdated and unsupported Jimmy Johnson Draft Value Chart for their decisions despite several studies that have shown the chart to be highly flawed in certain parts. I want a GM who understands this and tries to aggressively exploit the teams that don't.

 

Would you recommend the (modernised) Harvard chart ?