Comments on: Thompson's offseason agenda starts with Pickett

By: shaggytoodle

shaggytoodle — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 16:53:20 +0000

The reason we lost 08 is we lost the CLOSE games Rodgers would give us a lead or tie it within 7 minutes or less in the fourth and the Defesnse would let the other team just march right down the field. Our defense played well for the most part of the season, and it showed how good the Packers future could be with both side of the ball as long as they are able to sure up O line and add depth to the secondary.

By: Adam-Chris Scheftersen

Adam-Chris Scheftersen — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 13:42:39 +0000

Majik Bullet says:
January 31, 2010 3:26 PM
4-12 wasn’t all Ted, and yes, Favre did play very poorly. He tried to do too much with the very little Ted gave him to work with. It seemed to me that he almost wanted to fail that year so he could justify firing Sherman and trying to push Favre out the door.
And yes, Favre is the main reason Ted won that award. He carried that team all year. Terrible running game. Average defense. Number 2 offense in the league, even with the 21st ranked rushing attack. 13-3 that year with Brett, 6-10 the next season with the same team minus Favre.
—————————
Revisionist history abounds. Key defensive injuries in 2008. You want to complain about the “average defense” in 2007? Look at the decline in the defense’s performance between 2007 and 2008.
And the offensive numbers between 2007 and 2008 were very similar. Love how you try playing off the fall from 13-3 to 6-10 as all Rodgers. You’re a loon.

By: PurpleRaid12

PurpleRaid12 — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 19:46:40 +0000

That’s not how the story goes Ambrose…..

By: Ambrose

Ambrose — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 13:46:26 +0000

PurpleRaid12 says:
February 2, 2010 12:13 AM
A man in a bar leans over to the guy next to him and says, “Wanna hear a joke about Packer fans?”
__________________________________
No.

By: PurpleRaid12

PurpleRaid12 — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:13:44 +0000

A man in a bar leans over to the guy next to him and says, “Wanna hear a joke about Packer fans?”
The guy next to him replies, “Well before you tell that joke you should know something. I’m 6′ tall and 220 pounds and I’m a Packer fan. The guy sitting next to me is 6’2″ tall, 240 pounds and he’s a Packer fan, and the guy sitting next to him is 6’5″ 280 pounds and he’s a Packer fan too.
Now, do you still wanna tell that joke?”
The man says, “Nah, not if I’m gonna have to explain it three
times.”

By: badfish69

badfish69 — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 21:13:10 +0000

I know he has won more regular season in two years. My point is the main goal is playoff appearances and wins and in that category Favre is 1 ahead with no Super Bowl appearances.
As far as splitting the fanbase, that is an emotional argument. It is not a GM’s job to make decisions based on emotion. The fanbase isn’t as split as you think it is anymore. The more fans see what Aaron Rodgers is capable of the more are seeing and understanding Thompson’s thinking on the move. From where I am standing I see less and less people who are clinging to the “Brett should still be here.” argument.

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 20:42:45 +0000

Favre has won 5 more games the last 2 seasons, not 1, including a playoff win. The move also split the fanbase in GB. This is why it’s a failure.

By: badfish69

badfish69 — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 18:57:26 +0000

Majik,
I don’t see how it has proven to be a terrible choice. I would agree with you if Brett would have led his new team to the Super Bowl one of the last couple of years, but that’s not the case. Last year the Packers missed the playoffs as did Brett and the Jets. This year well we all know what happened. If you look at just wins and losses you may have a point, but in the end the only thing that matters is making the playoffs and winning games. In that category Brett is one game better than the Packers in two years. To me that doesn’t prove anything.
You say Packer fans just follow blindly and make excuses? Maybe some do, but I know many Packer fans who are critical of both Thompson and McCarthy. Just because they don’t bolt and go cheer for the Vikings doesn’t mean they don’t question.
Players, coaches, and front office personnel come and go, but the G on the side of the helmet remains constant. Packer fans will stand behind the players that wear that helmet, and that’s the way it should be.

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 18:39:44 +0000

You don’t have to come out and say you hate him to make it apparent. Your words and opinions are pretty strong indicators of your true feelings. It’s OK little guy, don’t get so worked up.

By: packers4life

packers4life — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 17:20:06 +0000

“I know you hate Favre, and you feel like a scorned lover, but try not to let it effect your ability to think rationally. This is, of course, assuming you ever possessed that ability, which, after reading some of your posts, is in doubt.”
Where in any of my posts did I say I hated Favre? Hm? I said I don’t like Favre the VIKING. I did not say I didn’t like Favre the PACKER.
and just because alot of Packer fans remained loyal to their team and started cheering for Rodgers doesn’t make them Favre haters.
“On a side note, what has Favre done to you, personally, to cause you to hate him so much and rip on him like you do? 2 way street man.”
Oh I don’t know. Maybe because he plays for the Vikings? Yes I know what he has done to Green Bay but as long as he plays for a hated rival, I don’t like him. Simple as that. And I am not the only one who thinks that. There are plenty of Packer fans out there that have the same reason. If he was playing for a different team though, Packer fans wouldn’t really care all that much but it is a completly different story when he signed on to one if not the most hated team for Packer fans.

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:26:11 +0000

4-12 wasn’t all Ted, and yes, Favre did play very poorly. He tried to do too much with the very little Ted gave him to work with. It seemed to me that he almost wanted to fail that year so he could justify firing Sherman and trying to push Favre out the door.
And yes, Favre is the main reason Ted won that award. He carried that team all year. Terrible running game. Average defense. Number 2 offense in the league, even with the 21st ranked rushing attack. 13-3 that year with Brett, 6-10 the next season with the same team minus Favre.

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:18:43 +0000

badfish
I never said he would lead them to the Super Bowl, just that he gave them a lot better chance. And as a GM, the job is to field the best team possible to give you the best chance of winning.
I understand that teams need to worry about the future, but they also need to worry about the present. If any team other than Green Bay pulled that move, then followed it up with a 6-10 disaster, they would have empty seats. But the blind faith, never questioning Packer fanbase just lets it go, and makes excuses for what has proven to be a terrible choice.

By: Adam-Chris Scheftersen

Adam-Chris Scheftersen — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:14:18 +0000

Majik, it just highlights your unbelievable hatred for Ted Thompson.. 4-12? That’s all Ted. Favre and his inability to throw passes to his own team had NOTHING to do with that. Ted wins executive of the year? Oh, well Favre is the only reason.
Get a life. Anytime you try to play yourself off as objective you should be slapped.

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 15:10:46 +0000

Adam
Way to go, you predicted I would say something that I’ve already said before. Good work, Miss Cleo.

By: badfish69

badfish69 — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 22:27:24 +0000

Majik,
I actually agree with you that at the time of the trade Brett Favre was the better player, but how long can the inevitable be delayed? Let’s say that they let Brett come back for 2008. Now maybe they win the Super Bowl or maybe not. With Brett’s history in big playoff games I would tend to say they wouldn’t have, but you may have a differing opinion on that.
Well now Favre has played the 2008 season for the Packers and Rodgers sits the bench for his 4th straight season. Guess what? Teddy boy is in the exact same predicament again only this time the 1st round draft pick who is ready to see the field contract is going to expire. So now what? If Favre comes back (which he would have wanted to) Rodgers walks. If you tell Favre your moving on, your in the same position we are in now.
See? Delaying the inevitable.
Favre couldn’t win the Super Bowl with the talented Vikings this year. Couldn’t do it when Ahman Green was piling up 2000 all purpose yds, and couldn’t do it when the Giants practically handed them the game with missed field goals. What makes you think the would have brought the Packers there in 2008?

By: rcpecook

rcpecook — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:02:48 +0000

Someday down the road if he were to turn traitor and go to work for the vikings the fans would be smooching his hinder and saying how wonderful he is.

By: Adam-Chris Scheftersen

Adam-Chris Scheftersen — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 18:03:18 +0000

Wow, that worked incredibly well. I predicted what a douche would say, then the douche went ahead and said it.
=========================
Adam-Chris Scheftersen says:
January 29, 2010 12:36 PM
He did win Executive of the Year a couple years ago.. But I suppose that was all Brett’s doing.
They go 4-12 or 6-10? “That’s because of Thompson.” Thompson wins Executive of the Year? “Well, Favre is the one to congratulate for that.”
=========================
Majik Bullet says:
January 29, 2010 1:33 PM
Good work Super, bringing up the award that Favre won him. What has he done since Favre? 17-15.

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:32:58 +0000

badfish
Never said I don’t like Rodgers, he’s a good young player. He has flaws, and comes off as a bit arrogant, but most NFL players do.
It’s just that I have the ability to see the mistakes Rodgers makes, and not blame someone else for them. I think that, if he figures a few things out, he could be really good. But when Thompson traded Favre in favor of Rodgers, he traded away the better player, which is what made me mad. It has nothing to do with Rodgers, and I have no problem with him. Just because I’m able to find flaws in his game, and realize he’s not perfect doesn’t mean I hate him, it just means I’m not a homer.

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 11:16:20 +0000

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 11:11:26 +0000

packers4life
Wow, what a moronic post. I give Rodgers crap because he deserves it. I don’t put him on a pedestal like Pack fans do, I realize he actually does make mistakes. But I have also acknowledged, many times, how good of a player he is. I don’t see how mentioning how he fumbled or threw a pick is “giving him crap.” It’s simply recalling events that took place. On a side note, what has Favre done to you, personally, to cause you to hate him so much and rip on him like you do? 2 way street man.
And if you really think Rodgers’ pick on the first offensive play is irrelevant, you have hands down taken the #1 idiot spot away from Supersuckers, not an easy task. How can throwing a pick on the first drive and immediately going down by 7 points, on the road, be irrelevant? That pick and early score set up the entire shootout tempo of the game. A play like that rattles the entire offense, as evidenced by the turnover on the next drive, and 17-0 hole. And the short field TD shakes up the D, as evidenced by the 51 points on the board.
Favre’s pick didn’t put them in a hole, it took away a long shot scoring opportunity. Both of Rodgers’ turnovers led to TDs. Favre’s pick at the end of the game led to overtime. NO got the ball for the game winning drive via a coin flip, not a turnover.
I know you hate Favre, and you feel like a scorned lover, but try not to let it effect your ability to think rationally. This is, of course, assuming you ever possessed that ability, which, after reading some of your posts, is in doubt.

By: badfish69

badfish69 — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 10:36:25 +0000

People like Majik give Rodgers crap because they are projecting their contempt for Thompson on to him. If Favre would have stayed retired in 2008 they would be here saying the same things about him that we are. It’s sad really. Not liking a guy because of something he had no control over all because of an emotional attachment to number 4.

By: packers4life

packers4life — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 00:40:58 +0000

“It’s just that Rodgers’ was just more immediately devastating.”
Dude what the hell has Rodgers done to deserve the crap you give him on this site? I mean, seriously. Are you just that upset about him replacing the old man? Sure he put his team in a hole early but he still managed to lead them back from behind, something you seem to skip in your post.
“Rodgers put his team in an early hole with his first pass. Favre led his team to 7 points on his first drive.”
You are probably the only person that thinks that stat is relevant. Well, it isn’t. What matters is that Rodgers scored a total of 5 touchdowns in his playoff game while Favre only had 1.
and Favre put his team in an even bigger hole with his last pass.

By: badfish69

badfish69 — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 00:39:01 +0000

Rodgers fumble was a killer, but he should have hit Jennings on the first play to end it. That stuff doesn’t bother me at this point though. I expect a guy who has only started 33 career games to maybe try to do to much and make mistakes. Dude probably had the greatest 2nd half performance in Packer playoff history. He at least deserves some props for that.
What I don’t expect is a guy who has started something like 5000 games to throw across his body to the middle of the field for a pick. Especially considering if he would have run it would have been a 50 yd try or if he would have actually thrown it to the guy the play was designed to go to it probably would have been around a 45 yd. try.
Brett Favre is a great QB, but blowing up in the playoffs is not a new trend with him. 4-7 now since 1998 with some pretty good teams around him.

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 18:51:38 +0000

Ruvell
I would not put equal blame on Favre an Rodgers, but pretty close. Rodgers put his team in an early hole with his first pass. Favre led his team to 7 points on his first drive.
Both guys had horrible turnovers at the end, the difference being Favre’s pick led to overtime, while Rodgers’ fumble was the final, end all play. The Saints’ winning drive was set up by a coin flip and a kick off. The Cardinals winning drive was a Rodgers fumble.
Yes, Favre’s pick took away a chance at a 56 yard field goal, but that’s not exactly a given. I know Longwell is a great kicker, but so are Kaeding and Rackers, and we saw how well they fared with much easier kicks.
But, both plays were equally bone headed and awful, no excuse for either one. It’s just that Rodgers’ was just more immediately devastating.

By: Ruvell100

Ruvell100 — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 16:30:54 +0000

Ragner says:
1st off genius, I’m not a packer fan. I’m entertained that TT won’t even think about FA every year, that he hoards draft picks like a child does candy. Which he usually blows by making bad picks.
TT’s lifestyle is common knowledge. Not that there is anything wrong with it. I aim to offend everyone, that your panties are in a bunch thrills me.
I am not consumed about the things you have listed, I am consumed by masturbation. I just rubbed one out typing this post to you. This would explain my bad spelling and grammar, as i am typing one handed.
You are the one with no life or a pathetic one. You get all riled up at people typing crap on a message board! people you don’t even know!!
Why do you care? It’s a trash talking site, you don’t like it, maybe you should go elsewhere.
By the way. How big is your penis?
_____________________
Jeff, this may be the post of the year. But I still think you’re an idiot.

By: Ruvell100

Ruvell100 — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 16:20:55 +0000

Majik-
Honest question. Would you place equal blame on Rodgers and Favre for their respective playoff losses this year?

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 14:58:26 +0000

Super, I don’t 100% blame Rodgers for that loss. But it’s hard to argue he didn’t choke at the end. He held the ball for 3+ seconds, then took a sack from a blitzer who came from his line of sight, and still coughed it up. That’s a horrible play, and it cost them the game.
And don’t say Rodgers had to make a play or they lose, that’s why he held it. I’m aware as well as everyone else how their defense was getting abused, I even told you it was going to happen the week before. But the Packers do have the best defensive player in the league, so who knows what would have happened if the Birds got the ball.

By: TheHydraPart6

TheHydraPart6 — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 14:07:40 +0000

Majik I dont blame favre for losses or compliment ted for wins. I know it goes much deeper then that. i use your own arguments against you. such as super rodgers couldnt get the job done in az. i think you know that wasnt the case. if you really believe that then you are indeed a football idiot. id like to think you dont really believe it.

By: Majik Bullet

Majik Bullet — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:45:29 +0000

Ruvell
I’m angry because morons like you and Super come on here spewing idiocy about every football topic there is, and then proceed to act like you know everything. Then when proven stupid and wrong, you both either disappear or act as if it never happened. I will give you credit though, for actually admitting your mistakes once in a great while.

By: Tompadre

Tompadre — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:41:06 +0000

Just saw the franchise & transition tag numbers – DE 12 mil franchise, 10 mil transition.
If GB tags Kampman and he signs it, they’re on the hook for a ton for a guy who has some question marks right now. If he’s tagged I don’t think a team will do the sign & trade because they won’t want to pay him that much. There might be a way that after the trade they can re-do the contract, but I can’t remember the pay stipulations for trading tagged players.
Is Pickett that big of a priority with Raji around? If they sit on Collins doesn’t that run the chance of creating some bad blood and making it dificult for adventually agreeing on a long term deal?