Thompson's Dilemna
Ted Thompson is in his second year as GM. He inherited a team that had the longest non-losing season streak in the league and went 4-12 in his first year. He then fired the coach and previous GM, spent a substantial amount of money on some free agents, traded away our best young offensive player because he was disgruntled and as of September 1 will be responsible for over half the roster.
In other words....he's had his mulligan. Reasonable people accept that our cupboard was running bare and with last year's injuries we simply didn't have the horses to compete as well as we'd like. And some of the horses that we did have didn't play very darn well, like Brett Favre. Some people want to just dismiss that by saying "he didn't have anybody around him" but the bottom line is that he made critical mistakes in a number of games that really hurt the team. If you're going to excuse his mistakes by saying "He didn't have anybody around him" then I guess we need to apply that same standard to Ahmad Carroll, Will Whitticker, etc.
Personally, I'm not going down that path, and I don't think Thompson is either. When he fired Sherman, at the press conference he used the word "Accountability" about 40 times and the message to me was that he didn't think Sherman held players accountable for their performance and Exhibit A on that would have been Brett Favre last year.
Now he's hired Mike McCarthy and signed him to a 3 year deal. By the end of this season, both TT and M3 will have two years remaining to make this a winning team. IMO, Favre will have to play a lot better than he did last year or they won't invite him back, plain and simple.
This is a business and their bacon is in the griddle. They don't have the luxury of continuing to ride an aging horse until it feels like it doesn't want to run anymore.
One of the writers who covers the Packers exchanges some emails with me, and essentially he said that when M3 and TT met with Favre in Hattiesburg during the Senior Bowl, TT flat told Favre that he couldn't play like he did last year and Favre was pretty unhappy with that because nobody has told him in a long time that he didn't play good enough. In fact, right after that meeting was when he told ESPN that "if I had to make the decision right now, I'd choose to retire".
I was further told that TT would be just as happy if Favre would have retired because he views him as an obstacle to rebuilding and if he had, then Thompson would have pursued a young, veteran QB like Griese or Ramsey to compete with Rodgers. McCarthy, on the other hand, wants to be known as the guy who extended Favre's career and returned him to the upper echelon of QBs.
And this makes sense from McCarthy's perspective. If he's successful, the team will be successful and his reputation as a guy who can get the most out of QBs will get a tremendous lift. It'll be enough to keep him employed in the NFL for the rest of his life.
It also makes sense from TT's perspective. Favre ties up $12 million in salary cap space and his iconic status is actually supressing the new young leaders on a team that desperately needs some on field leadership. Additionally, there is the little fact that in the free agency era teams that go 4-12 don't turn it around with a 37 year old QB at the helm, so I'm sure that TT would have much preferred if Favre had retired.
But that's all water under the bridge right now. Favre is here and he's the starting QB of the team. If he plays well this season then I'm sure they'll want him back next year. If he doesn't, then it presents a dilemna, and the dilemna becomes even worse if Rodgers doesn't show in training camp and exhibition games that he's ready to be a starter because then, regardless of what you think of him, Favre remains our best option.
So TT then will either have to admit he made a mistake with Rodgers and go with a 38 year old QB who isn't going to take us anywhere (and costs a ton of money) OR he'll have to ask Favre to retire so he can combine that cash with other money and get a free agent like Matt Schaub or Drew Brees in 2007.
In any event, TT does not have forever to turn this team around. IF the Packers finish near the bottom of the NFC.....as many prognosticators say they will....then he simply must field a team in 2007 that has people belieiving he's on the right track or he'll be on his way out here....and McCarthy right along with him.
In other words....he's had his mulligan. Reasonable people accept that our cupboard was running bare and with last year's injuries we simply didn't have the horses to compete as well as we'd like. And some of the horses that we did have didn't play very darn well, like Brett Favre. Some people want to just dismiss that by saying "he didn't have anybody around him" but the bottom line is that he made critical mistakes in a number of games that really hurt the team. If you're going to excuse his mistakes by saying "He didn't have anybody around him" then I guess we need to apply that same standard to Ahmad Carroll, Will Whitticker, etc.
Personally, I'm not going down that path, and I don't think Thompson is either. When he fired Sherman, at the press conference he used the word "Accountability" about 40 times and the message to me was that he didn't think Sherman held players accountable for their performance and Exhibit A on that would have been Brett Favre last year.
Now he's hired Mike McCarthy and signed him to a 3 year deal. By the end of this season, both TT and M3 will have two years remaining to make this a winning team. IMO, Favre will have to play a lot better than he did last year or they won't invite him back, plain and simple.
This is a business and their bacon is in the griddle. They don't have the luxury of continuing to ride an aging horse until it feels like it doesn't want to run anymore.
One of the writers who covers the Packers exchanges some emails with me, and essentially he said that when M3 and TT met with Favre in Hattiesburg during the Senior Bowl, TT flat told Favre that he couldn't play like he did last year and Favre was pretty unhappy with that because nobody has told him in a long time that he didn't play good enough. In fact, right after that meeting was when he told ESPN that "if I had to make the decision right now, I'd choose to retire".
I was further told that TT would be just as happy if Favre would have retired because he views him as an obstacle to rebuilding and if he had, then Thompson would have pursued a young, veteran QB like Griese or Ramsey to compete with Rodgers. McCarthy, on the other hand, wants to be known as the guy who extended Favre's career and returned him to the upper echelon of QBs.
And this makes sense from McCarthy's perspective. If he's successful, the team will be successful and his reputation as a guy who can get the most out of QBs will get a tremendous lift. It'll be enough to keep him employed in the NFL for the rest of his life.
It also makes sense from TT's perspective. Favre ties up $12 million in salary cap space and his iconic status is actually supressing the new young leaders on a team that desperately needs some on field leadership. Additionally, there is the little fact that in the free agency era teams that go 4-12 don't turn it around with a 37 year old QB at the helm, so I'm sure that TT would have much preferred if Favre had retired.
But that's all water under the bridge right now. Favre is here and he's the starting QB of the team. If he plays well this season then I'm sure they'll want him back next year. If he doesn't, then it presents a dilemna, and the dilemna becomes even worse if Rodgers doesn't show in training camp and exhibition games that he's ready to be a starter because then, regardless of what you think of him, Favre remains our best option.
So TT then will either have to admit he made a mistake with Rodgers and go with a 38 year old QB who isn't going to take us anywhere (and costs a ton of money) OR he'll have to ask Favre to retire so he can combine that cash with other money and get a free agent like Matt Schaub or Drew Brees in 2007.
In any event, TT does not have forever to turn this team around. IF the Packers finish near the bottom of the NFC.....as many prognosticators say they will....then he simply must field a team in 2007 that has people belieiving he's on the right track or he'll be on his way out here....and McCarthy right along with him.
Nice article, PN. I lean to being a brett supporter, but I agree can't play like he did in 2005 and expect to be back in 2007.
Reply to this
Hey Bluto!! Yeah, I don't really think anybody thinks that Favre can play that way, and most don't think he will, although they're quick to say that his poor play wasn't his fault.
I've been crunching the numbers. I think a minimum acceptable performance from him this year would be about 500 passes, 18 or fewer INTs, 4 or fewer lost fumbles,and at least a 6.7 yards/attempt average.
I think that's pretty much the minimum. If he can't achieve that then it's time to move on because if we can't get better quarterbacking than that we simply can't win.
You know, we moved the ball really well last year....we outgained 12 of our 16 opponents. But critical mistakes just killed us over and over.
Regardless of who gets injured or how our rookie guards play, #4 simply has to take better care of the ball.
Reply to this
if the key players on offense (i.e. the starting running back and the #1 receiver and the starting tight end) can stay healthy this year, and if the o-line can execute the new zone blocking scheme, i see no reason why brett can't have the kind of season he was having in the first six games of the 2005 season. that would far exceed the minimum numbers you have set out for him.
during that stretch, he had one poor game, one fair game, two good games, and two excellent games. interestingly, that translated to only one win.
the game at minnesota is a perfect example of how bad the team around favre really was last season. favre completed 28 of 36 passes (77.8% completions!) for 315 yards. he threw two touchdowns and had no interceptions or fumbles. with a qb rating of 121.6, the packers still managed to lose.
Reply to this
Favre did have a very good game against Minnesota....in fact, he had a very good three game stretch against New Orleans, Carolina, and Minnesota. But even with that good stretch he had 10 turnovers in our first six games and some of them really hurt.
You posit an awful lot of IFs in your initial paragraph. Personally, I've got a lot of reservations about our line play early on in the season and whether or not our running back situation is going to be adequate.
The Minnesota game is a very interesting game that I've analyzed in depth on numerous occasions. Favre played about as well as could be expected and we still lost that game. We had two key plays in that game: One on special teams and one where our nickel back (Joey Thomas) was simply unable to execute a basic football play and keep his man in bounds after he caught the football. As a result, Minnesota was able to stop the clock and set up for the winning field goal.
That was actually kind of a common theme on our defense in the first half of the season......we had breakdowns that hurt us badly. Nick Barnett in the opener against Detroit; Joey Thomas against Cleveland; the missed field goal against Tampa Bay ......all of these critical mistakes that cost us games. But we also had numerous needless turnovers that dug us holes that we couldn't dig our way out of.
I am not optimistic about this team at all this year; they look very much like a 5-11 team and one of the weaker squads in the NFC right now. I hope I'm wrong, but that's the way it looks to me.
I'm glad you found the blog.!!
Reply to this
i'm not very optimistic about this season either. i think the o-line is still going to be subpar. i think relying on three running backs who are all coming back from injuries is way too risky. i wish we had a true #1 receiver.
throw in the discontinuity of an all-new coaching staff and new blocking schemes, and i just don't see how this offense is going to get consistent production.
Reply to this
Since we're being honest about our thoughts on the Packers' chances, I tend to be an optimist. This year, though, I'm not feeling it. Too many unknowns this year - interior o-line, RB, special teams, new coaching, favre's frame of mind. Even our D, since we have a new coaching staff in place. I think we're going to be battling Detroit for third in the North. I hope I'm wrong.
Reply to this