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

[OneTwoSixFive]

11 minutes ago, Green19 said:

Has anyone seen our drafts from 2010-2013. Like I stated before everyone has missed and bad years... go look at some of New England’s drafts, if you want ugly.

Also they don’t view drafts like we do. They trade picks for other players, Graham/Richardson. Colors drafts differently.

Are SF fans going to be upset they don’t have a second rounder this year? Or if their whole draft class is garbage? Probably not given they have jimmy g.

It's picky I know, but you might want to edit your post to say the 49ers don't have their own 2nd round pick. They do have a second (from NO).

[packfanfb]

5 minutes ago, ChaRisMa said:

Clicks = Money.

Ted is recommending someone from his stable to Mark Murphy. In fact, realistically, Ted is Mark’s boss in this regard. He’s the architect of all of this. Ted and Mark already know who’s getting the job. It’s one of Ball, Guntekunst, or Wolf. Ted will scout for them.

McCarthy is comfortable with whichever. He’s figuring out the DC position. 

Everyone is making this out to be a major change. It won’t be.

Go listen to MMs presser and tell me again he (a) isnt happy that TT is out and (b) doesnt want a more aggressive GM to replace him. Beyond that, it defies common sense for MM do not want an aggressive GM. He wants to keep his job. That ain't happening without better results which, as you got a glimpse of this year without 12, requires a better overall roster, especially on defense. 

[Green19]

5 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

That's my point.  Everyone is going crazy for Schneider's drafts from 2010-2012, and then ignoring the drafts after.  It's the same people who are harking on TT's drafts since 2011, and then ignoring the previous work.  You have to be consistent with your stance. 

EDIT: The Seahawks traded a 2nd this year for Sheldon Richardon, and a 3rd this year and a 2nd next year for Duane Brown.  And they missed the playoffs.  What kind of reaction do you think that Packers fans would have if they gave up three premium picks and missed the playoffs?  We'd have demanded Ted's head on a silver platter.

How am I not being consistent? I’ve been saying every GM has hits and misses. I realize Seattle hasn’t had good drafts lately. My point is some of those drafts you have to look at the other players they acquired.

And just like drafts... you can’t  judge them on 1 year. Brown becomes a mainstay and helps that oline where those wasted picks? Richardson destroy offenses next year and beyond... was it a waste? Veterans need time to adjust to new surroundings too.

How would the reaction be by Packer fans? Same as any group on any subject... 25% will violently hate it, 25% will love it unconditionally and the other 50% will be indifferent wanting more evidence.

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

We wouldn't bc you add those pieces or similar quality players to a Rodgers-led team and we wouldnt miss the playoffs. We'd likely be a top seed. That's the difference between having Aaron Rodgers and Russell Wilson, etc. Those same moves that might not make sense for some teams make perfect sense for a team that doesnt need 9 draft picks, but rather needs 2-3 vet studs/quality players. 

First off, do you truly believe the Packers would have missed the playoffs had Rodgers stayed healthy?

Secondly, there's a trickle down affect with those trades.  Let's say you make those trades, and Rodgers does get hurt.  We're still out of the playoffs, only now we're out a 2nd and 3rd round pick.  You realize how much that hampers your flexibility on draft day?  If you want to pick on Day 2, you HAVE to trade down from your 1st round pick.  That means going from 14th to 24th or something of that range.  That means you're at a disadvantage.  Related, you're also taking away snaps from our young guys.  IF the Packers had traded a 2nd round pick for Sheldon Richardson, that means less snaps for Kenny Clark.  Kenny Clark was pretty damn good.  Adding Sheldon Richardson/Duane Brown to a Rodgers-led Packers team doesn't really push the needle nearly as much as you'd think it would.

[skibrett15]

2 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

#2 Edge

Yeah.  I like Clark as next year's Demarcus Lawrence type improvement guy.  Playing 2nd most snaps after Bennett on the DL there, and if they could add some snaps from Richardson and find that 2nd edge guy to replace Avril I think Clark is in for a huge year.  Likely hitting the market when Seattle can't afford him.

[AlexGreen#20]

1 minute ago, Green19 said:

How am I not being consistent? I’ve been saying every GM has hits and misses. I realize Seattle hasn’t had good drafts lately. My point is some of those drafts you have to look at the other players they acquired.

And just like drafts... you can’t  judge them on 1 year. Brown becomes a mainstay and helps that oline where those wasted picks? Richardson destroy offenses next year and beyond... was it a waste? Veterans need time to adjust to new surroundings too.

How would the reaction be by Packer fans? Same as any group on any subject... 25% will violently hate it, 25% will love it unconditionally and the other 50% will be indifferent wanting more evidence.

You've got a lot of faith a man with 2.5 sacks in his last 29 starts is going to start moving the needle next year. Additionally, Richardson is a free agent. If you downgrade a second round pick to a fourth round pick comp pick for 1.5 sacks in 15 games from Sheldon Richardson, that's not a trade I'd be feeling too cocky about. 

[Leader]

Ask me - this has to be our #1. Somebody who wants nothing more from life than coming off the edge to hunt down and hit a QB - preferably before he's released the football.

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, Green19 said:

How am I not being consistent? I’ve been saying every GM has hits and misses. I realize Seattle hasn’t had good drafts lately. My point is some of those drafts you have to look at the other players they acquired.

And just like drafts... you can’t  judge them on 1 year. Brown becomes a mainstay and helps that oline where those wasted picks? Richardson destroy offenses next year and beyond... was it a waste? Veterans need time to adjust to new surroundings too.

How would the reaction be by Packer fans? Same as any group on any subject... 25% will violently hate it, 25% will love it unconditionally and the other 50% will be indifferent wanting more evidence.

I wasn't necessarily referring to you specifically, more speaking in general.  I think the stance that Schneider is this slam dunk candidate is a harsh stance to take, especially for those who are complaining about TT's drafts since 2011.

And I'm not really going to make opinions based on projections.  Paul Richardson might actually destroy defenses next year.  Doesn't change the fact that up until this point he's been a disappointment compared to what they invested in him.  He's going into his 5th year in the league

To recap, my issue isn't with wanting Schneider.  It's those who are adamant that Schneider is this great GM who use the 2010-2012 drafts to defend their stance are the same posters who will conveniently ignore his drafts since 2013.  It's the same posters who have been hyper critical of TT's drafts since 2011.

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You've got a lot of faith a man with 2.5 sacks in his last 29 starts is going to start moving the needle next year. Additionally, Richardson is a free agent. If you downgrade a second round pick to a fourth round pick comp pick for 1.5 sacks in 15 games from Sheldon Richardson, that's not a trade I'd be feeling too cocky about. 

Very much this.  IF the Seahawks lose Sheldon Richards to FA, that trade was a disaster.  If they retain him, it's still not great.

[AlexGreen#20]

3 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

Yeah.  I like Clark as next year's Demarcus Lawrence type improvement guy.  Playing 2nd most snaps after Bennett on the DL there, and if they could add some snaps from Richardson and find that 2nd edge guy to replace Avril I think Clark is in for a huge year.  Likely hitting the market when Seattle can't afford him.

Maybe. Clark and Lawrence are two different kinds of headcase.

It's not like Clark didn't get his reps this year. 742 snaps is a lot of reps for an Edge guy. 

[AlexGreen#20]

3 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

To recap, my issue isn't with wanting Schneider.  It's those who are adamant that Schneider is this great GM who use the 2010-2012 drafts to defend their stance are the same posters who will conveniently ignore his drafts since 2013.  It's the same posters who have been hyper critical of TT's drafts since 2011.

So much ******* this

[skibrett15]

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Maybe. Clark and Lawrence are two different kinds of headcase.

It's not like Clark didn't get his reps this year. 742 snaps is a lot of reps for an Edge guy. 

Yeah.  I think it was too many.  Too many run defending snaps, not enough get after it snaps.

He played 40 more than lawrence.

[packfanfb]

3 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

First off, do you truly believe the Packers would have missed the playoffs had Rodgers stayed healthy?

Secondly, there's a trickle down affect with those trades.  Let's say you make those trades, and Rodgers does get hurt.  We're still out of the playoffs, only now we're out a 2nd and 3rd round pick.  You realize how much that hampers your flexibility on draft day?  If you want to pick on Day 2, you HAVE to trade down from your 1st round pick.  That means going from 14th to 24th or something of that range.  That means you're at a disadvantage.  Related, you're also taking away snaps from our young guys.  IF the Packers had traded a 2nd round pick for Sheldon Richardson, that means less snaps for Kenny Clark.  Kenny Clark was pretty damn good.  Adding Sheldon Richardson/Duane Brown to a Rodgers-led Packers team doesn't really push the needle nearly as much as you'd think it would.

Of course we still make the playoffs with 12, thats basically a guarantee and part of my point. When you have 12, making the playoffs shouldnt be a celebration, but an expectation. That's why I couldnt care less about our playoff appearance record under TT and MM. I care about championships and even SB appearances. That's the only goal here. That's where we consistently fall short and where some bolder moves could mean the difference. 

Regarding Richardson, I wouldnt have wanted him anyways bc our Dline was fine but imagine getting a Richardson caliber OLB or CB, the positions we needed (and still need). Imagine giving up a 2nd-3rd round pick for a guy like that. Sorry if I dont care about Rollins or Fackrell losing snaps because I made that type of move. And if we have to miss out on Josh Jones or Mont Adams to do it, darn. 

[ChaRisMa]

6 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

Go listen to MMs presser and tell me again he (a) isnt happy that TT is out and (b) doesnt want a more aggressive GM to replace him. Beyond that, it defies common sense for MM do not want an aggressive GM. He wants to keep his job. That ain't happening without better results which, as you got a glimpse of this year without 12, requires a better overall roster, especially on defense. 

Ted gave Mike the opportunity, seemingly senselessly. They won a ring together. They are always on the same page with talking points. Never throw each other shade. 

Isnt MM better off with whoever Ted picks in that situation than an outsider who will want his own guy? They are so loyal to each other it isn’t even worth the thought. That’s been one of the reasons for sustained success. Always be loyal, even if that loyalty means allowing someone to leave for a better job.

[Green19]

9 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You've got a lot of faith a man with 2.5 sacks in his last 29 starts is going to start moving the needle next year. Additionally, Richardson is a free agent. If you downgrade a second round pick to a fourth round pick comp pick for 1.5 sacks in 15 games from Sheldon Richardson, that's not a trade I'd be feeling too cocky about. 

I’m not putting faith in anything. I’m merely stating that drafting/trading/etc all inherently has the same risks of hitting and missing. And if a management group chooses to use picks to get veterans you must judge everything together.

I would also say like picks, veterans need time to adjust. Clearly Pete and John felt if they got Richardson in the door and with their defensive group he would restart his career.

Do I personally think he will? Odds aren’t likely to me, but I can easily be wrong.

Better question can anyone say using a 2nd rounder on a guy that played mostly college basketball and only one year of football in the draft isn’t as risky?