Ted Thompson (left) is a man who has a stated goal and method of doing business that he believes in and sticks to. Had Favre retired after the first year TT was GM as everyone thought he might, Ted Thompson would be the perfect man for the job. He is passive and allows the draft to come to him. He recognizes that a lot of free agents do not produce. His strategy is great for rebuilding a team. Chances are that this was part of the reason why he was hired in the first place.
Unfortunately for everyone involved, the team guessed wrong and Favre came back causing the situation to be no longer correctly aligned. The Packers had a GM who was competent in rebuilding and a QB who was looking for a GM who could give short term fixes for immediate gratification.
So who is to blame?
Ted Thompson?
Brett Favre?
Bob Harlan (right)?
Let's look at each of them to see where the blame lies:
Ted Thompson - Was hired with the intent of rebuilding a Packer's team that had salary cap issues and was slightly above mediocre the previous few years. Had a plan for rebuilding and the way he was going to run the team that was likely shared with Harlan at his hiring. Has stubbornly held to that plan.
I cannot assign much blame in his direction. He is doing what he was hired to do. Guys don't get a lot of opportunities to run teams and they are entitled to it the way they think is best. Gets unfair labels about being passive in the draft and being cheap in free agency. Seems reasonable to me that he would want to not spend much money after dropping quite a bit of scratch last season (Woodson, Pickett) and an absence of quality free agents. As far as the draft, he is certainly better than Sherman.
Brett Favre - In his twilight years. Still an above average QB. May have mislead the team about his longterm intentions.
Seems to me that he cannot be blamed for wanting the team to add players that can help him now as opposed to helping the team in 3 years.
Bob Harlan - Hired Ted Thompson.
He incorrectly gambled that Favre would leave and that he should hire a GM to rebuild the team. Should have hired a more aggressive, win now GM type to give the Packers a chance to take advantage of Favre's remaining years.
I think a lot of the blame has to go on the original hiring of Ted Thompson by Bob Harlan. Favre may also be to blame if he led Harlan to believe he wouldn't be around much longer, validating Bob's hiring of TT. It is too easy to blame Ted Thompson for doing exactly what he was hired to do. When he drafts guys like Justin Harrell, he is taking a less sexy player. If Harrell stands in the middle and plugs the holes which would be bored through us by Matt Birk, Steve Hutchinson and Bryant McKinnie for Chester Taylor/Adrian Peterson, then the pick is just as good as an offensive weapon.
7 comments:
I'm surprised you didn't add Sherman and the hot dog vendors into the mix.
Seriously, I don't buy the argument that Favre lead the Packers into thinking he was going to retire.
I'm just a fan but it has ALWAYS been clear to me that Farve would retire when he showed physical decline in his game. That has not happened, he is still a top 10 QB and he'll play until he can't play good game.
Harlin's fault for hiring Thomson? Maybe. I think there is blame in all corners, and Thomson has not done a lot to help the public impressions of what is going on in the Packer offices.
-David
"Favre may also be to blame if he led Harlan to believe he wouldn't be around much longer"
This is mostly thrown in there as something that can never be proven or disproven. My point was that, under the circumstance that private conversations were misleading, then Favre has to take some of that blame because they would have led to the mismatch in the hiring of TT.
As far as Thompson and public perception, the way that he runs the team is a lightning rod for criticism, regardless of how he deals with the media (in his case poorly). Fans, Favre, etc. want flashy players. He is going to take guys he thinks help the team the best without compromising his plan. For good or bad, I don't think he is doing anything wrong because he is doing what we knew he would do when he was hired.
I'm a fan and I don't want a fancy player, never have, never will. I want guys that can play, period.
I just think its pointless to try an figure out "whos to blame". And I still don't buy that the Packer's we're fooled into thinking Brett was going to retire and that this influenced who they picked for a GM.
Besides, the argument that the Packers would have gone with a different GM based on who is the QB is not a strong one to me. You get the guy you think can lead your team, based on the team and the organization, not a single player. Any player, Favre included, can go down on any given Sunday.
Thompson is a odd duck. He is either a genuis or an idiot savant. I'm still not sure which one it is.
"Thompson is a odd duck. He is either a genius or an idiot savant. I'm still not sure which one it is."
Now that is a line I can stand by.
I still stand by my point that the Packers may have gone with a less conservative GM if they had 3-4 year commitment ahead of time from Favre.
Dude, learn how to align your images or stick to text.
Will you fix it for me? I couldn't figure it out
Can anyone tell Scott is around 20 somethings quite a bit in his job?
Dude.
Post a Comment