Bold Prediction Thread

oakleaf said:
Et tu, Shrine? Man, I must be the lone person who likes TT and his draft and develop method and overly-cautious approach to free agency.
Click to expand...

Your not alone. I like TT's approach and it has been successful. There have been times I wished he'd make a FA splash but that isn't always what it's cracked up to be either.
 
eyecatcher said:
Your not alone. I like TT's approach and it has been successful. There have been times I wished he'd make a FA splash but that isn't always what it's cracked up to be either.
Click to expand...

It all depends on what your expectations are and how you define "success"
 
Hard to remember from forum to forum, but maybe reasons for the opposing view haven't been expressed here. One the one hand, I don't think anyone is going to argue that TT hasn't provided a lot of good+ players. However, since he took over, six other teams' management have provided the same level of SB success as the Pack, and two others have more. For what I think is a significant portion of fans, the Lombardi is what it's all about. I realize that (including 2010) that means there are 23 teams that have completely failed over that period, but most of those have had a wasteland at QB and were never expected to compete, while (although he certainly deserves that credit for the pick) TT has had that position locked his whole tenure.

And, the Pack's one win was with a number of journeymen performing way over their heads for that one year (not before, and most never again), guys who were not expected to be more than adequate backups - not the ones who TT drafted as primetime players.

Most of use who complain about the lack of FA signings aren't looking for the splash acquisition, just someone to plug a hole (again, as with several on the 2010 team). In fact, the splash signing of Peppers points this out as well as anything. There was a question about his ability to perform at his age, but the thinking was that the Peppers we's seen in the past on one side and Matthews on the other would cause panic on the opposing side's offense. Didn't (hasn't) quite work out that way, partly because Matthews isn't on the wing because no stopgap ILBs were obtained.

Again, no doubt TT is in the top (pick a number) of GMs, but a few years from now, none of us will be able to recite chapter and verse about the number of playoffs, division championships, or whatever else some would label as success, but we'll all know about 2010 and (hopefully) any other SB wins. I know the team has to make the playoffs to win it all, but qualifying every year and failing every year is more discouraging (to me) than missing out once in a while.
 
I am not saying TT is perfect but...

1. The 15-1 season also was not a TT failure. In the playoff loss to the Giants, the receivers dropped 9 passes and the team had 4 turnovers.
2. There is nothing TT could have done to change the outcome of the Seattle NFCCG meltdown. The right players were there and the players and HC failed.

Both of those seasons could have and should have ended in SB victories.
 
eyecatcher said:
I am not saying TT is perfect but...

1. The 15-1 season also was not a TT failure. In the playoff loss to the Giants, the receivers dropped 9 passes and the team had 4 turnovers.
2. There is nothing TT could have done to change the outcome of the Seattle NFCCG meltdown. The right players were there and the players and HC failed.

Both of those seasons could have and should have ended in SB victories.
Click to expand...

In any other forum, I'd let this go. There are always posters who have to be right and will continue to nitpick. However, here I'm a lot more confident that opinions can be reasonably exchanged.

Hence, I'd point out, almost peripherally, that it was the players TT brought in that failed. More to the point, you note that MM failed, and the guy trusted to make the good draft choices function well is a TT choice, as well. As the team continues to make the playoffs and set records for last-play exits, maybe some of the responsibility for MM's teams melting down falls on the guy who does the hiring. I know that if I was top dog and had given my operational leader what he needs, and the result is oh-so-close time after time, I'd have to wonder a bit.

Pro football is a team game, very complex, subject to outside influences, et. al. Picking one guy, player or management, as the savior or downfall just isn't reasonable. However, if one is singled out as highly effective without noting his limitations, that's another problem.
 
eyecatcher said:
Your not alone. I like TT's approach and it has been successful. There have been times I wished he'd make a FA splash but that isn't always what it's cracked up to be either.
Click to expand...
I'm with both you guys. Ted's hasn't been perfect but he's kept our team competitive. Consider his team record since arriving in 2005, it's 108-67-1.
My biggest criticism since he arrived has been his reluctance to pull the trigger at times, but overall he's served our team very well.
It ain't too bold a prediction to say that the 2016 Pack will come out of the gate as contenders again this season.
I read just the other day that the Packers are one of 5 teams projected to win 10.5 games....the other teams being
New England, Carolina, Pittsburgh and Seattle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top