Thompson Shouldn't (And Probably Doesn't) Care That McCarthy Is Frustrated

The general manager sets the vision for the franchise. His head coach needs to deal with whatever frustrations come with it. 

You couldn't turn anywhere on the Packers' corner of the Internet on Sunday without finding some kind of reference to one particular section of Bob McGinn's latest column. 

From McGinn:

McCarthy, however, got almost no help from Thompson in 2015 other than the first five selections in the draft. According to several sources, McCarthy is fed up with his boss’ unwillingness to take a chance and reinforce the roster with veteran players that might be unknown to the Packers but have the talent to contribute.

By and large, Thompson does put together good rosters. They’re the foundation of the Packers’ success. All Thompson need do is be a little more open-minded.

Ok. So I got so many questions about this on Twitter, I thought I'd respond via Periscope. Enjoy. 

0 points

Comments (109)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
lebowski's picture

January 24, 2016 at 11:04 pm

Nothing to see here, move along….

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

January 24, 2016 at 11:30 pm

The only thing TT should care about is the product on the field. And that product was not good enough in 2015 given the expectations heading into the season.

I also sincerely hope TT is not satisfied with the Packers not getting to a Super Bowl (and getting to just 1 NFC Championship) game with Aaron Rodgers at QB the past 5 seasons.

MM seems to be taking a fresh approach (accountability?) given the disappointments of this season.

Will TT do the same? Or will he continue to plug a few of our holes while ignoring others as he has the past several season (while of course never making trades for players and mostly avoiding free agency)?

Please TT, take a look at Carolina & Denver this season (or NE last year, the Seahawks in 2013, etc.), adding veteran players from other teams is not a bad thing.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Amanofthenorth's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:33 am

And who would you have cut two years ago...Janis? Pennel?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Nick Perry's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:05 am

Goodson, Palmer, Thornton... I believe it was McGinn who used the Mason Foster example, maybe it was someone else. It really doesn't matter who used it, it was a perfect example.

After the first and second week of FA started this last season there were several good "Football Players" still left who would have improved the Packers. Mason Foster had played pretty well for Tampa Bay the previous year and as the FA period wore on nobody signed him. Finally Washington did and he ended up replacing the previous starters on the Redskins this past season. Foster would have been a CHEAP addition for the Packers at ILB, a position ignored since the preseason of 2012. He was a guy who I posted about several times right here for TT to sign. He also would have been a hell of a lot better than Palmer or Thomas.

BTW... Did you see Owen Daniels yesterday? This was a player who was reported to be have been to Green Bay for a visit 2 years ago. He's had 2 pretty nice seasons for the Broncos and have a feeling he would have been a perfect fit in Green Bay. He might not be the best blocker but either is Richard Rodgers. All I'm saying is there's so many players out there whom Thompson could sign and really improve the Packers, yet he continues to ignore the obvious.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:06 am

Nick - For the most part, I think TT gets it right. However, I was with you regarding Mason Foster this year. Without question he would have improved the ILB play.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

January 25, 2016 at 12:56 pm

Thompson's current strategy would be fine if he had done a better job of drafting 2011-2014. And if he had I wouldn't mind his lack of creativity in bringing in outside talent. But he's left glaring holes at ILB, TE, offensive Line depth and up until recently Safety, mostly because too many of his draft picks where busts. He's responsible to field a pool of players McCarthy can work with. I know Homer's find Ted above question, but his team is on a downward trajectory right now and he needs to look in the mirror just like McCarthy has.

"You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit."

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spud Rapids's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:03 am

What on earth makes you think the team has a downward trajectory?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:31 am

Did you not watch the games this season?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IowaFan's picture

January 25, 2016 at 11:30 am

#1 WR out from day one, #3 suffers high ankle sprain and misses multiple weeks, Rookie WR Montgomery who is effective early, suffers leg injury and never plays after week 6. OL banged up almost all year. Lang with a bad shoulder, Linsley's ankle, Bak's knee, Bulaga's knee. Starting ILB Barrington out from day 1.

And yet this team still wins a road playoff game and nearly wins two.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spud Rapids's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:07 pm

Thanks for the measured specific response... the Defense improved greatly and so did special teams. The offense wasn't healthy. One year doesn't suggest a trend or trajectory, try to make an assessment outside of one season.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
chugwater's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:53 am

For every Foster there's a dozen Hardy Nickerson and Joe Johnson signings out there. No guarantee.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

January 25, 2016 at 10:05 am

This is not true.

The Seahawks, Patroits, Cardinals, Panthers and Broncos all built their rosters by drafting well AND being smart with Trades and Free Agency.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

January 25, 2016 at 12:57 pm

If you look at all of those rosters, the real difference makers have been draft picks. Carolina is the best example. Their two star players were both top 10 picks. Both of them signed big contract extensions in the last year. We'll see how aggressive the Panthers are in free agency going forward.

The system is designed to make sure good teams get bad. The way the Packers have remained good, year in and year out, is the exception, not the rule.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:11 pm

No, the real difference is Carolina will SUPPLEMENT its good draft picks.

Greg Olsen was acquired by trade. Kurt Coleman led the NFL in picks and had 2 yesterday, and was a bargain free agent pickup before the season. Michael Oher was a bargain pickup (cast aside by the Ravens and Titans) at LT.

Sorry, no one relies only on draft & develop to the extend TT does. Nobody.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:50 pm

"Kurt Coleman led the NFL in picks and had 2 yesterday"

I had two picks yesterday from my living room in MI...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

January 25, 2016 at 02:05 pm

But, who are the difference makers? Newton and Keuchly. Both top-10 draft picks. Yes, Carolina has contributors that were acquired by free agency. So do the Packers: Peppers; Guion, Kuhn, and James Jones.

Let's be honest: fans couldn't give a rip about "contributors" and journeymen pick-ups like Coleman and Oher. Fans want to see a big splashy signing.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

January 25, 2016 at 02:36 pm

I (and many here) would be VERY happy with a late March or perhaps even post June 15 FA signing. That might cost a 6th round comp pick. And let's be honest - how many 6th round picks has TT had in 10 years? How many have turned even into red chip players? I can't think of even one.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

January 25, 2016 at 05:42 pm

I'm calling BS. NOBODY cares whether Thompson signs another Brandon Chillar or Jeff Saturday. Anyone who says they do is lying.

No one even *remembers* Koren Robinson or Marquand Manuel. In the eyes of fans, these players don't even *count* as free agent signings. Raise your hand if you have an Adrian Klemm jersey.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Nick Perry's picture

January 26, 2016 at 06:10 am

I agree, I'd be really really happy with a FA signing or two a few weeks after the period starts. Thompson was really smart adding Guion and Peppers because they didn't cost a Comp Pick, they were cut by their former teams.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cap/

There's some teams with a hell of a lot of space including Chicago. Daniels contract just tok a big chunk of $$ from the Packers 2016 cap but their still not in too bad of shape. Look at Buffalo and Miami with all their spending...SCREWED! Free Agency CAN be great if used to fill one or two weak spots with something better, NOT build your team.

Look at the dead cap space of the Packers, less than $700,000, that's impressive and something I've alwats said TT does better than anyone, manage the cap.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

January 25, 2016 at 05:27 pm

Nick, Owen Daniels should have been signed, no question.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:18 am

Northman, I would have had no trouble cutting Backman. Terrible pick, should have been a UDFA, and should not have even remotely made the 53, yet he was one of the first to learn he had made the 53. Inconceivable!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 25, 2016 at 12:15 am

I often read comments asserting that signing FAs is a bad idea not because you overpay (that is something of a given) but because too often the signed player does not play as well as he did for his original team. I get that GB might ask a player to do different things than what had been demanded by the player's original team even if the guy played the same position in a scheme similar to GB's.

I would love to read an article evaluating the actual play of FAs with their new team vs. their original team, maybe based on PFF scores. The big FAs might be interesting, but I would be far more interested in the mid-tier FA signings, say $3.5 million to $6 million AAV contracts.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

January 25, 2016 at 12:46 am

I used to love McGinn, but I am increasingly unsure about him. To be honest, I rather strongly suspect that the person who is "fed up with Thompson" is really Bob McGinn.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 25, 2016 at 02:40 am

Amen. it would be difficult to express it better than Marpag1 just did. [Notwithstanding that, I do think GB would be better off with some judicious dips into FA.]

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Amanofthenorth's picture

January 25, 2016 at 05:15 am

Yes! Crosby, Raji, Guion, Hayward would be a good start.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerBacker's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:18 am

Hayward is gone. He'll take the bigger deal from another team, just like House did last year.
The Packers will be fair in their offer to him, but he'll get bigger money elsewhere. And with Rollins and Randall both having strong rookie years and Goodson and Gunter in the wings, there are too many young CB's in the system to pay Hayward starter money.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:05 am

I agree and I don't think he is worth Davon House or Tramon Williams money. Like Sean Richardson, Hayward's football IQ doesn't seem to match his physical abilities. Too often he is slow to recognize the threat and tries to make up with speed. I like him for depth but not at starter money.

Hayward, Richardson, Quarless, Barclay, one of (Guion/Raji) and one of (Neal/Perry) won't make it back. Time to restock the shelves.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:12 am

They'll draft another CB. I can't see them putting themselves in a position where they might have to rely on Goodson playing a regular role at CB. I cringe every time he goes into coverage (Hello, Jarrett Bush).

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LeagueObsrvr's picture

January 25, 2016 at 12:21 pm

I agree. After drafting Randall and Rollins last year, I believe the plan is to let Hayward walk in free agency and fill his position in the slot with Rollins. I read somewhere the Packers had a first round grade on Rollins and were pleasantly surprised he was still available to them in the second.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Nick Perry's picture

January 26, 2016 at 05:53 am

Hey Pete, completely agree with your thoughts on how Hayward will be handled. Ted has a $$ amount he'll figure Hayward will be worth, offer it, and he'll either take or he won't. Actually Thompson was smart as hell to draft Rollins too. The Packers secondary is in excellent shape and I love Gunter, just not Goodson but who knows, Tramon Williams took time.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spud Rapids's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:12 am

I agree 100% Marpag, his article about blaming McCarthy and Thompson was almost an emotional rant and didn't seem very measured or analytical. linke below. The whole article is spent on the offensive woes but fails to neglect that the defense and special teams (where McCarthy spent more time this year) were much improved.

McGinn also goes off on not playing Janis over Adams. I think we all forget McCarthy's faith in Crosby when he had a rough stretch payed off big time for the team. Adams, IMO, heading down the same path and had his best two games at the end of the year. It was a shame he got hurt again because he may have been the difference in the Arizona game.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/blame-for-underachieving-season-f...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
lou's picture

January 25, 2016 at 11:15 am

You have it backwards, Adams being injured allowed for the "difference in the Arizona game", it gave Janis his first opportunity from scrimmage and his 2 TD's got them to overtime. Here is McGinn's analysis of your "star" Adams (D-);

DAVANTE ADAMS: Fell flat on his face when presented with the chance to be a suitable replacement for Jordy Nelson. Dropped 12 of 96 targeted passes, a 12.5% drop rate that led the team and was altogether unacceptable. Lacks the speed to outrun most cornerbacks and the quickness and route refinement to win consistently in the possession game. Offered next to nothing (3.02-yard average) after the catch. Missed 3 1/2 of Games 3-6 with an ankle injury but maintained he was fine by mid-season. The Packers know they can't play Adams next year as much (61.8%) as they did this year, but as a second-round draft choice it's worth giving him another extended look. Needs to put away some of the bravado and become more of a professional. Grade: D-minus.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spud Rapids's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:22 pm

I do not believe Janis is better than Adams. Minus 2 desperation plays Janis was pedestrian in the Arizona game. 5 catches for 45 yards and a touchdown. Personally, I don't think Adams was ever healthy until the end of the season, his rookie season he demonstrated quickness and ability to break tackles like he did vs. the Vikings and Redskins at the end of the year. And once again McGinn get's personal and acts as if he knows Adams: "Needs to put away some of the bravado and become more of a professional." Also, i'm not sure where he get's his 12 dropped passes from both of these sites reference 6, in fact neither of them reference any receiver except Mike Evans having 12 drops in league.

http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/drops/2015/

http://scores.nbcsports.msnbc.com/fb/leaders.asp?type=Receiving&range=NF...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
lou's picture

January 25, 2016 at 04:03 pm

McGinn has covered the Packers since the Lindy Infante days, hard to find anyone in the press that is closer to the inner workings in the press. Based on your comments you must still believe you can keep your doctor and your health care plan, time to get with the real world.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
lou's picture

January 25, 2016 at 04:13 pm

I forgot to add, "desperatiion plays", they were the 2 most important plays of the season, talk about clutch and the other catchesyou call "ordinary plays" were when he was tightly covered but still made the catches to keep the chains moving. Adams's hands were paddle boards no matter in clutch or garbage time. For the bloggers that didn't read McGinn's ratings her is Janis's grade; (real life rating not dellusioinal)

JEFF JANIS: Established himself as one of the team's two best players in the kicking game. Reckless, nasty and fast. Offensive player with a defensive temperament. Straight-line kickoff returner with an impressive 28.1 average in 18 runbacks. Played 80 of his 175 snaps from scrimmage against San Diego and Arizona in the playoffs when injuries left the coaches without another option. Seized the moment with receptions of 46, 33, 60 and 41 yards in those two games. His nine catches averaged a team-high 24.9 yards, and he dropped just one of 26 targets. His litany of shortcomings — speed is straight-line, body catcher, raw on releases and adjustments — is falling on deaf ears. Must be given the chance in 2016 to prove that he can't play. Grade: C-plus.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spud Rapids's picture

January 26, 2016 at 10:26 am

It's pretty obvilous McGinn is overly critical of everyone. He only gave one player an A on his 2015 report yet he blames the whole of the season on McCarthy in his article and claims the Packers have a great roster. There is no consistency. He referred to Nelson as having a good but no great season in 2014.... Nelson had 98 rec, 1519 yds, and 13 TDs... if that isn't great what constitutes a great season?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 26, 2016 at 01:21 am

I looked at these drop statistics several games ago and concluded they must have a very specific definition of the term. Sporting Charts lists Abbrederis with no drops. I don't think that is correct. Still, I give credit to Spud - at least he does have something to point to. I've always had a poor impression of Davante as I thought during his rookie year that he did everything pretty well except get open. He has done nothing to change my opinion.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
lou's picture

January 26, 2016 at 07:11 am

McGinn's stats have to come directly from the Packers which they in turn supply to the NFL per proper protocol. There are other respected sources that have their own definitions. I will always go with the teams definition because that is the level of play they hold the players accountable for. Spud's links to those stats and scouting reports are irrelevant at this point, the performance of Adams and Janis are on tape and the scouts can say either I was right, wrong, or incomplete on my judgement. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, that is what the coaching staff did with Adams, week after week he didn't get open or catch the ball and his blocking was sub par too boot. In regards to his reference to Crosby getting a 2nd chance, I am all for that but the difference in Crosby's case is that there was NO question about his talent level, it was purely his confidence level (see Tiger Woods), based on McGinn that is not the case with Adams (Lacks the speed to outrun most cornerbacks and the quickness and route refinement to win consistently in the possession game). so that is not an apples to apples comparison.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spud Rapids's picture

January 26, 2016 at 09:56 am

Fine if you want to use McGinn's analysis as the end all be all here's what he said about Adams after his rookie season:

Davante Adams: Fluid, smart and competitive. Zipped past injured Jarrett Boykin as No. 3 in Game 4 and never looked back. Dropped four of 79 passes for drop rate of 5.06%, lowest at the position, and averaged a solid 5.41 yards after the catch. Doesn't have tremendous size or burner speed. Plays with strength, can work outside or inside and doesn't scare from traffic jams. Has starter's capability.

No consistency

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
lou's picture

January 26, 2016 at 12:47 pm

Anyone that has watched the Packers 2015 season and can claim Adams is a better receiver than Janis has to be currently under the "NFL Concussion Protocol". It's just that simple, I give you credit for defending your favorite football player but your holding a butter knife in a gun fight. Better luck next year.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
barutanseijin's picture

February 13, 2016 at 02:21 pm

Right. And Packer blogosphere's homerismo = level headed analysis.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
egbertsouse's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:23 am

I'm glad that somebody is finally fed up with Tightwad Ted. I know it's blasphemous around these parts to like McGinn but he is one of three sports writer in the state to not kiss the collective Packer ass and publish an independent thought once in awhile.
TT basically has a sound approach but he is way too rigid and refuses to vary from it even when circumstances warrant. That rigidity causes him to miss out on guys like Marshawn Lynch, he just can't pull the trigger. His plan controls him, he does not control his plan.

OK, now all you fan boys can go back to reading Vic Ketcham and get all your Packer-approved propaganda.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Brian's picture

January 25, 2016 at 04:03 pm

Completely agree. One item that I find fascinating is how TT signed Guion as a FA and stood behind him this year after the gun/domestic violence stuff became public knowledge. Then Cohen and McGinn blasted the Packers for having him on the roster. However, McGinn goes on to chastise TT for not signing free agents which Guion was a FA signing. I get it, we want squeaky clean FAs :). Too many contradictions McGinn. My season grade on him is a 1/2 football based on interviews of my confidential sources :)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:00 pm

marpag1 - Well done sir, well done.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ferrari Driver's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:17 am

Pretty tough to field the best team in the NFL when you're drafting in the lower portion annual draft.

Thompson has done a remarkable job to keep the Packers at/near the top of the NFL during the last decade.

Both the salary cap and the NFL draft are designed to lower the winning percentage of the top teams and raise the winning percentage of the lower teams.

That makes it interesting for all us football fans.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packmaniac's picture

January 25, 2016 at 05:28 pm

Now subtract Aaron Rodgers from the equation and insert any non-franchise QB of your choice and what's the record of that roster? Ted's best pick -- his saving pick -- was his first pick as GM

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Nick Perry's picture

January 27, 2016 at 05:32 am

BOOM!!! Even this year, with as poor of season he had (By Rodgers Standards) Rodgers greatness won them an additional 3 or 4 games by himself.

BUT I have to give credit where credit is due, Thompson has picked some VERY good players along the way. The 2011 and 12 drafts have helped put the Packers in the position they were in this past season, they were terrible drafts. 2013, 14, and 2015 were much better drafts though Ted still picks players in rounds he could get them in 3 rounds later lor as UDFA. Thornton, Rodgers, Blackman, and Ringo to man a few.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:50 am

Forgive me if you've seen this before.

SB 50 will produce the 8th different winner of the last 8 Super Bowls. 0 repeats. The Packers are among them. Those other 7 teams all use FA more than GB. Yet somehow TT would turn GB into a dynasty by not keeping so many of his own players, screwing up his comp picks strategy and shooting craps on FAs.

TT gets 6 picks in the 1st 4 rounds this draft. He's pretty good at drafting talent.

Seahawks 2013? How did Jimmy Graham work out this year? Result: A pretty crappy O line.
Denver this season? Vernon Davis. The ones they signed who did and did not work out = their pretty crappy O line. How about Denver in other seasons? Let's just ignore all that because FAs are always going to be the saviors.

This is TT's team. Is everyone forgetting he signed Julius Peppers and it didn't cost him a comp pick?

Remember Howard Green? He has an XLV ring. Letroy Guion? He's played pretty well for the Packers. The Packers own FAs re-signed? They don't count because the grass is always greener somehow. Comp picks lost: 0.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:42 am

To me there is nothing wrong with Thompson's way to build a team. He continues to draft and develop, which continues to keep the roster young and in competition each year for a shot at going to the Super Bowl.
I would like him to find more of the Letroy Guion type of players though. A guy that comes in and costs virtually nothing, yet provides a boost.

Most people want to complain about the Packers way of building their team. But like you said. 8 Super Bowl Winners in 8 years... There are only 2 teams that have been to the playoffs and won a Super Bowl in the last 7 years. Packers and Patriots.
A couple of years ago everyone was talking about the 49ers and how great they were and how they wish the Packers were more like them. Well, how are they now?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:55 am

There are teams every season that treat free agency like it's Christmas morning. 30 or 31 don't win Super Bowls at the end.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:23 am

31 teams every year don't win the Super Bowl. 30 Teams don't make it to the Super Bowl.

If it was easy to win the Super Bowl, wouldn't the Patriots or Seahawks, or whoever all have won more then 1 Super Bowl in the last 10 years?
The only team to win more then 1 Super Bowl in the last 10 years - NY GIants. And in the last 10 years they have missed the playoffs (6 times missed) more then they have made it to the playoffs (4 times made).

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IowaFan's picture

January 25, 2016 at 11:36 am

Well to be fair, if York/Baalke didn't run Harbaugh out of town, Niners would still be in the mix.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:51 pm

The decline had already started before Harbuff left town.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:42 am

You forgot DeMarco Murray and Suh. Both not only failed to move the needle, but both saw their coaches fired. The key to winning the Super Bowl is not a bunch of high priced free agents. The key to winning the Super Bowl is having a handful of key players that are *underpaid*. This typically means a handful of players that are playing at a probowl level but are still on their rookie contracts. That's what the Packers had in 97 (with guys like Levens and Freeman) and that what they had in 10 (with guys like Matthews and Raji).

With a free agent you are (almost) always paying full market value. (One exception would be Charles Woodson, but everyone seemed to think he was already washed up when Thompson signed him.) You aren't really making the team better, you are just robbing Peter to pay Paul. Making one area of the team stronger but weakening other areas.

This is why you see the arc of a rapid ascension and a quick drop off. The 49ers and Seahawks are a good example. Once they have to start paying their underpaid players, fielding a dominant team gets very hard.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:14 am

"The key to winning the Super Bowl is having a handful of key players that are *underpaid*. "

THIS

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:20 am

It's the GM's job to go out and put the best 53+ players on the roster that he can.

It's the coaches job to take the 53 players and use them the best way they can be used. Use their strengths and try to limit their weaknesses.

IMO, Thompson put together a strong enough 53 roster to make another deep run into the playoffs if not a trip to the Super Bowl. There are certain things though that GM's can't anticipate. Injuries, and players taking a step back in play. 2 things that really haunted this team in 2015.

IMO, McCarthy didn't do a good enough job of putting his players into the best position to succeed.

Examples: McCarthy came out and said after the first Lions game where Abbrederis had a good game, that he was ready to play a month earlier. So if he was ready, why wasn't he playing? Especially when Adams was really struggling? We all saw that in the San Diego game when Janis had 3 huge plays in the game that he could contribute. Yet he barely played until the final game. They could have found ways to use his speed and play making ability.
Richard Rodgers clearly wasn't used the way he should be used. He is not a Jermichael Finley type of TE, yet they still used him the same way. Rodgers was at his best when he was used to attack the middle of the field. Yet we still saw him running those out routes where he would catch the ball and get tackled immediately.
Both Kuhn and Ripkowski proved to be weapon out of the backfield, and yet were barely used that way.

IMO, McCarthy didn't do enough to use what he had. When injuries hit the WR position hard, and the talent wasn't where it has been, he didn't adjust his schemes to fit the players he had available.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:49 am

A lot of good points RCPackerFan. I agree that MM and the coaches stayed too long in a standard Jordy based offense. Running Richard Rodgers out into the flats epitomized the futility of this offense. They did leave Abby and Janis out of the fray until it was too late. While they may not have been totally ready, they were better than what we were fielding. I think that their delay demonstrates a weakness at WR coach.

The other nail in the coffin was the lack of a running game. This was a combination problem shared by the RB's and our O-line. Whether it was injuries, weight or something else, these areas of our team didn't respond enough to make a difference on an on-going basis.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 26, 2016 at 06:57 am

Essentially what they tried to do was replace Jordy with James Jones. And they are not close to the same type of player. It was really nice that we were able to get Jones back, they really needed to adjust their scheme without Jordy.

The lack of a running game really hurt. When your QB has his worst year, you need a strong rushing attack to balance it out. We never really got that.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
BELIEVER's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:09 am

Well put, MM could have done a much better job. I too can not understand why Adams continued to play. Abbrederis drops one and we don't see him for 4 games. Janis with his speed don't see the field? Is Rodgers making these decisions? I did not understand it then and I still don't understand it now.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:58 am

You said it brother.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CallingIt's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:59 am

I think Kuhn was the most under utilized player on thectwam last year. If or OL was healthy and Jordy had been there, perhaps a different story but you could see the impact he had when on the field and it hurt us mid to late season.

Also the refusal to include Janis and Abby until the last possible game shows a tendency toward lack of imagination, flexibility, or adaptibility ... or whatever you want to call it. It certainly does not appear to be one of MM strengths. Almost like an obsession with trying to cram square pegs into round holes.

That would be my advice for coach this off season. To learn to utilize your talent better, regardless of paycheck size.

TT advice...do a repeat of 2015 draft by getting us some LB's and TE. And keep that DL intact.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 26, 2016 at 07:19 am

What I don't get is how it took so long to get Kuhn on the field. Earlier in the season they started to use Ripkowski, which was fine because I thought he did a good job. Then they stopped using him and eventually started to use Kuhn again. And once Kuhn came in the offense got better.

I just don't get the refusal to use Janis and Abbrederis. Especially Abbrederis. They said he was ready to play just didn't play him.

I really do wonder if Janis had played more, got more experience if in the Arizona game he would have been more on the same page with Rodgers.
I agree that it felt like MM kept trying to fit square pegs into round holes.

That is exactly what I want them to do. Find ways to better utilize their players. Figure out each players strengths and find ways to use them. Find each players limitations and not let their limitations impact the teams negatively.

They have to get a receiving threat at TE. Thats a huge hole in the offense. They could really use a sideline to sideline ILB.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
tm_inter's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:32 am

Who's to say that MM is "frustrated" or "fed up" with TT? This is an attempt to drive a wedge between MM and TT which is unfair to both.

I don't like Nagler's assumption that MM is frustrated or McGinn's conjecture that MM is fed up. How can both guys know how MM feels? Better stick to more concrete matters.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:47 am

I'm not assuming anything. I'm referencing Bob's reporting. This is the second time he's written it and this time he indicated he has heard it from more than one source.

You can be critical of Bob all you want, but he didn't write it just to write it. There's fire under the smoke.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:13 am

There maybe an actual fire, might be just a spark. There maybe a lot of truth to what he wrote, or maybe little truth. Most likely we will never know the full truth.
Honestly it doesn't really matter to me. As long as the team has the best 53 players it can have, and the coaches use all 53 players the best way they should be used, that is all that matters to me.

That all being said, I still am just not a fan of his writing.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
D.D.Driver's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:40 am

Nagler: for Pete's sake, take a shower and shave. You are looking more haggard than Merle.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

January 25, 2016 at 10:52 am

You're going to be ok, D.D.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:00 am

Agree. At the least he is saying what we all have thought at some point.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spud Rapids's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:28 pm

Exactly.... saying what fans think. The word for that is pandering. McGinn is a fan panderer

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

January 25, 2016 at 10:16 am

It's obvious of course that Bob reported it, and I don't really doubt that there is some kind of source for it other than Bob McGinn. But there is not, and there has never been, such a thing as an unbiased reporter. Every reporter needs to make judgments about the validity of his sources, the circumstances under which the comments were made, and the specific words and phrases that he will use to write - dare I say, "spin" - his article, etc. Every story is colored by the author's bias, to some degree or another.

It seems to me that true sports reporting died a whimpering death quite a few years ago. These days, you almost never see a mere reporting of what happened. No, today we live in the age of "celebrity commentators." We need Peter King and John Clayton to give us their personal opinions and their deep insight into the matter. And while they're at it, they can also tell us what their favorite brand of coffee is, and how their daughter is doing in T-ball.

The thing that I used to like about McGinn is he was old school. He reported, not opined. He said, "I talked to five personnel men, and this is what they said." I loved that stuff. To be sure, Bob still does a lot of that, and I still read his stuff regularly. But it seems that more and more, he is getting swept away in the latest trend. It seems clear to me that more and more of his articles are about "This is what Bob McGinn thinks."

Bob doesn't seem to be aging well. He's turning into a crotchety old man who can't understand why the kids on his lawn don't do things the way Bob McGinn thinks they ought to be done.

Just my opinion.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:37 am

I think it's more of McGinn adapting from the old-school print journalist he was to the current digital media world. The norm for how news is reported is changing and it's being driven by our changes in consumerism...fast, catchy, dramatic...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spud Rapids's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:31 pm

I am curious if he took a comment out of context. What coach wouldn't like more free agent players right? If McCarthy said something like "I'm frustrated we didn't better address the ILB position." McGinn could run with that in whatever direction he chooses.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:13 am

MM's last press conference had a lot of angst around:

- Eddie Lacy
- A big body through the middle of the field
- moving Matthews back to outside LB

Whether he is calling out TT is conjecture. He is challenging all involved to address these issues for next season.

Will TT change? I don't see that cat changing his stripes. Basically, if we don't get it in the draft - we ain't getting it. The talent gaps on this team are almost chronic. It is the nature of the modern NFL. By the time you coach-up a draft choice, they are ready to hit FA. If you are not picking up a FA or 2, you are losing a FA or 2. Stockpiling draft choices is okay but you need to hit a lot of home runs and you need to keep most of them.

No doubt we will eventually get a stud ILB and TE, I just wonder how long after Rodgers has retired.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CallingIt's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:09 am

I don't think MM's message was to TT, but rather a joint message from them both. DB was clearly the position of need last year. This year, its ILB and TE or large target WR. (Or both). The big question is, where is our weak link going to be next year when all is said and done?

We get 9 picks this year. Lots of picks to stockpile depth players with better percentages of success.

Question: who could we package with our first round pick if we wanted to make a move up this year without losing high end draft picks?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 26, 2016 at 02:21 am

"I don't think MM's message was to TT, but rather a joint message from them both." Wut? To whom? To Eddie Lacy, I get, but not about moving CM3 back outside or the need for a big or fast WR who can go over the middle. Why announce that to the world? Making that statement sounded either dumb or petulant to me. Personally, I took it for the former.

It is early, but I don't see 20 prospects with a first round grade. I do see a ton of prospects with 2nd round grades, maybe 50. Not terribly interested in moving up in the 1st. Great depth at DL, LB, and OL.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:19 am

Team speed and OL...that's the goal for the 2016 draft. Make it happen.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
chugwater's picture

January 25, 2016 at 11:52 am

Biggest need will be on defense where Neal, Raji, Guion, and Perry are free agents. They did well as a group this year, but not all will be resigned. TT must replenish the coffers on the front seven like he did in the secondary the last two drafts.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 12:01 pm

I think it's only a matter of time before all teams running a base 3-4 have their own version of Deone Bucannon.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
packsmack's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:03 pm

Worked in the 4-3, too. Urlacher was a converted safety. No idea why it doesn't happen more often.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:54 pm

Urlacher was 6'4" and 260 lbs. You'll just never find true safeties with those numbers on a regular basis. And even though everybody says it, it's not entirely accurate to call him a college safety. At New Mexico, he was much more of a hybrid LB/S already at that time in something like a 3-3-5 alignment. He also spent a little time as a kick returner and even as a WR, so we're just talking about a special kind of cat with that dude.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
packsmack's picture

January 25, 2016 at 02:45 pm

I'm more talking about taking guys who can cover and hit and making them LBs working in any system. I wasn't comparing the two players.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:56 pm

Urlacher was a freak...came out of college at 6'4" 240-ish and could run like the wind. His speed was his only true DB trait. Bucannon is only 6'1" 220 or so.

But I agree: in the pass-happy NFL, you've got to be able to run, and you've got to be able to cover. I think you're going to see much more of this, especially with colleges playing lots of undersized LBs.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
WinUSA's picture

January 26, 2016 at 09:54 am

Well...first I must say that I have a problem with "unnamed sources" talking for McCarthy...If it didn't come directly from McCarty's mouth to the reporter...I personally would be really, really, pissed that that was said about me talking about MY fricken boss!

This was a snake bit year. Injuries beyond anyone's reason to expect the team to play at the level expected of this team. Did we play the best that we could... with the players we were force to play with during the course of the year...maybe, maybe not...the result was...NOT...so it was the GMs duty to do something...not NOTHING...there is an old adage..making a mistake is better than doing nothing at all...well TT made a mistake in MY opinion by doing NOTHING!

Comn Walker? Barcley? Sitton? at left tackle...we couldn't find anyone better??? Wolf would have shored up the injuries to at least protect his star: Rodgers...do you think Wolf would have warmed his hands under his buttox if it was Favre in that circumstance? I think not... Rodgers was crumpled like a WWE wrestler crumpling a piece of rice paper..time and time again..to the point where it affected his PSYCHOLOGY as well as his physical ability to perform at his level... It remains to be seen if he will EVER come back to what he was...that isn't a given.

Thompson has drafted for the most part pretty darn good, but the 2011 draft was a bust and the 2014 produced Daniels and Perry ...every manager get's a draft like those at some time in his career..but when he does...he had better make up for it somehow...and that somehow is FA.

As Packer fans, or for the players playing for the Green Bay Packers...they both deserved better than what they got this year.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

January 25, 2016 at 02:24 pm

Some very good points WinUSA. Under Ted we have stood behind the "next man up" badge and hoped that the next guy could work up to the challenge. It was apparent that the 2015 Packers had to ride out the season with replacements from within. You can talk about our O-line depth all you want but the beating that Rodgers took told the true story.

Your point about our 2011 and 2014 drafts is particularly troubling considering we are a draft and develop team. I like the stability of our organization, but if you don't have the resources in-house then you need to look elsewhere.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
aj's picture

January 25, 2016 at 02:59 pm

One thing, the Daniels and Perry draft was in 2012. I agree with your take though.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
packsmack's picture

January 25, 2016 at 12:56 pm

Saw someone on Twitter calling for us to sign Forte. You just can't explain it to some people.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CallingIt's picture

January 25, 2016 at 01:21 pm

No rumors flying round about Peppers and retirement that I see. Does he come back, or does he retire? Could go a long way in determining our in-house FA signings.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

January 25, 2016 at 02:11 pm

Peppers not only continues to play at a high level but he still makes those plays when you really need a boost. I think guys like Peppers and Mike Daniels are the standards that are the fabric of a team. I hate to think of this defense next year without some of these guys - especially Peppers.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

January 25, 2016 at 03:00 pm

If McCarthy is fed up, good for him! Ron Wolf would have signed more FAs. (He wanted to WIN.) Their about to lose Hayward, Guion,Raji,Perry, Neal and their kicking game may be in trouble. McCarthy knows what he has, and has become very close to players. Why should he not be frustrated. TT is Not about taking care of his own. TT is about taking care of a player he can't replace. Let them "Test the market" and gamble on the draft. PATCH,Comp pick ,PATCH,Comp pick, PATCH! With all the draft picks he's selected, we should of had another Trophy.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

January 25, 2016 at 05:45 pm

Ron Wolf's regime won one Super Bowl.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:25 pm

The free agency of the 1990s was not the same as the free agency of the modern NFL. Even Wolf has said that he doesn't want anything to do with running a team in today's NFL.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
WinUSA's picture

January 26, 2016 at 09:58 am

Correctomundo Horse...but,,,, he took us to TWO Super Bowls and built a team that since has become a prototype in its managerial structure through out the league...AND if that doesn't separate him from TT...how about Wolf's induction to the HOF??????

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CallingIt's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:46 pm

No way we lose all those guys. Probably not even half.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
chugwater's picture

January 26, 2016 at 07:04 am

Agree. We need to keep one of each pair: Perry-Neal, Raji-Guion. And then draft best available D linemen and OLB or ILB.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

January 25, 2016 at 03:00 pm

If McCarthy is fed up, good for him! Ron Wolf would have signed more FAs. (He wanted to WIN.) Their about to lose Hayward, Guion,Raji,Perry, Neal and their kicking game may be in trouble. McCarthy knows what he has, and has become very close to players. Why should he not be frustrated. TT is Not about taking care of his own. TT is about taking care of a player he can't replace. Let them "Test the market" and gamble on the draft. PATCH,Comp pick ,PATCH,Comp pick, PATCH! With all the draft picks he's selected, we should of had another Trophy.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ruppert's picture

January 25, 2016 at 03:12 pm

I don't think any prudent Packers fan thinks they should start signing big name/big money FAs. McGinn doesn't say that either. And I don't even mind staying out of the mid price FA world if bringing somebody in might hinder the development of a pick/udfa that they think has the potential to be good. But Justin Perillo shouldn't be on the roster. Barclay is brutal. Nate Palmer? These are the guys that can be replaced with cheap FAs that would be decent, not break the bank and not hinder anybody's development. Coming into this year, the ILB and TE positions both could have benefitted this way too. And nobody has to like McGinn but he's not just making things up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:32 pm

"But Justin Perillo shouldn't be on the roster. Barclay is brutal. Nate Palmer? These are the guys that can be replaced with cheap FAs that would be decent, not break the bank and not hinder anybody's development."

These are guys you don't really want to be playing at all, right? So why are you going to be buying guys on the open market that you are going to have to pay substantially more than guys making league bubkis? Every extra dollar you pay to roster slots 40+ is a dollar you can't pay to someone you need to keep. Maybe those replacements don't break the bank individually, but roster building and salary is a zero sum game. It adds up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
WinUSA's picture

January 26, 2016 at 10:10 am

Good Point Rupe.... I don't think anyone is saying break the bank for a guy like SUH.....but there are and have been some very high quality individuals that we have passed on in the past that I wish we would have been more aggressive: Lynch, Jackson, Olsen, just to name a few....granted it isn't an automatic that it will be successful...but when I think of the names: White, Jackson, Rison, S Jones, Howard....well I wonder what could have happened this year if we had made a move like...Crabtree, Gore, and about 5 quality line backers that could have filled the hole in the middle.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packmaniac's picture

January 25, 2016 at 05:37 pm

For all the talk of the roster-building, pro and con, no one has speculated on what the record of that roster might have been if you removed only one player from it: Aaron Rodgers. 10-6?? Ummmmmmm, I don't think so. Ted and Mike should be VERY happy to have that guy on their team. I have a feeling he's been a real job-saver over the years.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 25, 2016 at 08:35 pm

The NFL is a QB-centric league. It's hard to be consistently successful without a difference-maker at QB.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RVAborn's picture

January 25, 2016 at 05:47 pm

Ruppert you make great points. Many fans I have conversed with (excluding the internet) share similar views in questioning GB's aloof approach to signing other team's INEXPENSIVE free agents. Draft and develop is a great philosophy; however, to only adhere to that particular facet of improving a team when inevitably some picks won't work out while typically only filling holes with undrafted free agents. If those undrafted free agents don't work out, then we use draft picks (a few seasons later). Yet by that time there are more holes. It's a continuous cycle that can't be avoided unless either: every draft is full of homeruns who play at a high level under rookie contracts or you sign guys for a reasonable price that can step in and shore up gaping holes.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Horse's picture

January 25, 2016 at 06:30 pm

Yet over the last 7 years it's worked better than almost all other teams' methods. You could argue that the Pats might have an edge, all other things being equal. But of course all other things are not equal.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
chugwater's picture

January 26, 2016 at 07:15 am

Great point Horse. Even the gold standard of the NFL, the Patriots, who are no strangers to free agents, couldn't find adequate back ups to their porous offensive line.

Grass is always greener.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:35 pm

I am very curios to see how Eliot Wolf will operate once he gets the reins.

It's also interesting to see so many Ted disciples be far more aggressive in trades and free agency. Schneider is particular has swung for the fences (1st rounders for Harvin and Graham) and struck out. He's also almost completely ignored their offensive line. But he did sign Avril and Bennett. Again, Carroll has final say in Seattle, so who knows who's behind those moves.

McKenzie signs guys left and right, but that's been more out of desperation.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:41 pm

This game has disgusted me since it ended. Just out of curiosity, can anyone answer this question?

In the NFL Rule Book, is there a paragraph that says, "When the Ref flips the coin, the coin must Rotate."?

GB won the flip, but they flipped it again, because the coin didn't rotate. 1st I heard of this one. Does anyone have the answer?

LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

January 25, 2016 at 07:55 pm

No, it's not in the rule book. But Arizona won both tosses.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CallingIt's picture

January 25, 2016 at 09:51 pm

Actually, we called tails and it came up heads. A-Rod complained that it didn't flip so they flipped again and it came up heads again. It the end, so what. It's a coin flip for goodness sake, A-Rod made way to much of it. (not shouting at you vegas)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

January 26, 2016 at 01:42 pm

Callingit, My mistake!! I thought it came up tails. Sorry. I'm surprised they flipped it again?

LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razor's picture

January 27, 2016 at 09:55 am

So Nagler is frustrated. But he is missing the point. It's not just about THIS SEASON and TED IS NOT THE KING. Ted has a boss.

It's about disappointment in the playoffs the last five seasons. It's about all the stupid screw ups that hold the team back - including not enough talent.

It's about doing the same thing the last five years and expecting different results.

It's on Mike and Ted and Mark.

What about Mark? Where is Mark? Isn't he Ted's boss? Would it be out of line for him to kick Mike and Ted in the ass?

It wouldn't take major changes to improve results. Mark could lay it out for Mike and Ted...

Mike - straighten out your staff, protect Rodgers, manage the games better and don't wait until the end of the season to fix things.

Ted - go for talent wherever it is and stop looking only for the hidden gems. THE TEAM NEEDS MORE QUALITY AND LESS QUANTITY. Adapt to the needs of the team.

If Mark is too busy on the business side or the board is holding him back - MAJOR SHAME.

BOTTOM LINE: Good enough ain't good enough for the Green Bay Packers. All the pelts and statistics in the world ain't for shit if you can't win a championship. One championship in ten years is better than none but it ain't good enough. What have we got to lose by kicking Ted and Mike in the ass?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.