gbguy20
8 years ago

Another thread ruined by uffda

Originally Posted by: gbguy20 




This is for gbguy20...

Dang straight! Ted Thompson is the best GM in football. Why do you think we win the division every year? Duh, we have the best GM in the game. Our team is going to win it all after another infusion of talent drafted by Ted Thompson here next week. I feel sorry for the Bears, Vikings and Lions...they don't have Ted Thompson and that is what separates us from the other teams in the division.

It's great resting easy just knowing Ted Thompson makes stellar decision after stellar decision. Sure, he's not perfect but he's still the best. I mean, look at our record under him. 67-28-1 and that includes a 4-12 season when he cleaned up Sherman's mess. Wow, what a job he's done. No question he's a HOF GM when he walks away whenever that is because we know he can write his own ticket in Green Bay.

I lived through the 70's and 80's...TT has brought us heaven on earth and I don't want to go back to how it was back then. Thank your lucky stars Ted Thompson is here. I know he takes a lot of unwarranted criticism from those who just don't get it and I really can't understand why. He's AWESOME.

The guy is just good. Pack in capable hands. SB's aplenty coming. Thanks, Ted.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I agree with yoop... completely. This thread has only been "ruined" because the cult like norm has been challenged and refuted which "ruins" your inaccurate perception of what you want to consider...truth.

Stellar? LMAO. Just LMAO.

Who is better? I haven't analyzed other GM's performances enough to type a truly informed reply so I'll refrain. What I have done is very closely monitored Ted Thompson over the years, and he's NOT stellar. Why does that truth make you so uncomfortable? The lie needs to be put to rest once and for all about him.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Both of your responses justified my statement.
steveishere
8 years ago

I don't see that he has "ruined" any thread.
Just because he doesn't toe the company line on everything doesn't mean he doesn't give food for thought.
If everyone on this forum, or any other, just agreed on everything and posted the same thoughts over and over, there would be no sense coming to the forum much less participate.

Originally Posted by: yooperfan 



Its not just about having everyone agree. Several of us have tried to start different discussions in this thread with him but they have been ignored so he can just keep ranting about some editor using the word stellar. We could have had a good discussion on whether Ted is a good drafter or a bad drafter or even what it means to be a good drafter from page 1. We even tried to get a definition of what should be considered a stellar drafter. We didnt have those discussions though did we? Instead we just get paragraphs of bitching about the word stellar and Ted Thompson lovers and insults directed toward TT. Hence a thread with some good potential for discussion has indeed been "ruined"
texaspackerbacker
8 years ago
I hadn't followed this thread until just now. It seemed to be the only game in town.

I find it interesting that there is so much negativity toward uffda udfa - in this thread anyway. In some other ones, I could understand why. Saying he ruined the thread - this one anyway - is a bit over the top. The 2nd or 3rd post, I think - his first in this thread - was an intelligent rebuttal to a very shaky premise - that Ted Thompson is all that special as a GM or even as a drafter - removing from discussion the whole aspect that he stubbornly refuses to go after other teams' free agents to any significant degree. Beyond that, it seems to me, the "ruination" has been condemnation of uffda udfa and his responding to it.

In this particular case, I have to side with the basic premise of uffda udfa. One line of his really stands out. I paraphrase: "Where would Ted's teams be without Aaron Rodgers?" A big hell yeah to that!

It could easily be argued that drafting the best QB in the history of the world makes Ted a "stellar" drafter. It could just as easily be argued that he got lucky. It was a fairly obvious move at the time to draft a QB who had been speculated to have a 50/50 chance of being the overall number one pick when he was still there 20 or so picks later and Favre getting on in years - who knew he would remain good for so long. As uffda udfa said, you look at the team minus Aaron Rodgers, and you get a whole other picture - mediocre comes to mind rather than stellar.

And then there's the one Super Bowl won thing ...... I would suggest that if the GM had Aaron Rodgers and did a stellar or even above average job of building a team around him, we would have an all out dynasty - half a dozen or so SB wins in the years up to now with Rodgers as starter.

What I will give Ted credit for is that he is an excellent finder of UDFAs. The Packers have been way above average at finding and using them. They better be, because a LOT of those stellar draft picks have kinda fallen flat.

Many will also give Ted credit for keeping the Packers out of "cap hell" as the Niners and a few other teams over the years have ended up. I will give him limited positivity here, but not as much as many people. The fact is, Ted has played it too close to the vest - NOT maximizing the cap as much as he could have and arguably should have. There is limited cap space, yeah, but there are a lot of creative ways to stretch that which the Packers don't really do much of.

So all in all, it's easy to defend a GM who has brought us so many years of being near the top, but for the reasons I have stated, I don't buy the "stellar" thing. I don't even buy "above average". Ted has made a reputation based on benefiting from the greatness of Aaron Rodgers.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
earthquake
8 years ago

I hadn't followed this thread until just now. It seemed to be the only game in town.

I find it interesting that there is so much negativity toward uffda udfa - in this thread anyway. In some other ones, I could understand why. Saying he ruined the thread - this one anyway - is a bit over the top. The 2nd or 3rd post, I think - his first in this thread - was an intelligent rebuttal to a very shaky premise - that Ted Thompson is all that special as a GM or even as a drafter - removing from discussion the whole aspect that he stubbornly refuses to go after other teams' free agents to any significant degree. Beyond that, it seems to me, the "ruination" has been condemnation of uffda udfa and his responding to it.

In this particular case, I have to side with the basic premise of uffda udfa. One line of his really stands out. I paraphrase: "Where would Ted's teams be without Aaron Rodgers?" A big hell yeah to that!

It could easily be argued that drafting the best QB in the history of the world makes Ted a "stellar" drafter. It could just as easily be argued that he got lucky. It was a fairly obvious move at the time to draft a QB who had been speculated to have a 50/50 chance of being the overall number one pick when he was still there 20 or so picks later and Favre getting on in years - who knew he would remain good for so long. As uffda udfa said, you look at the team minus Aaron Rodgers, and you get a whole other picture - mediocre comes to mind rather than stellar.

And then there's the one Super Bowl won thing ...... I would suggest that if the GM had Aaron Rodgers and did a stellar or even above average job of building a team around him, we would have an all out dynasty - half a dozen or so SB wins in the years up to now with Rodgers as starter.

What I will give Ted credit for is that he is an excellent finder of UDFAs. The Packers have been way above average at finding and using them. They better be, because a LOT of those stellar draft picks have kinda fallen flat.

Many will also give Ted credit for keeping the Packers out of "cap hell" as the Niners and a few other teams over the years have ended up. I will give him limited positivity here, but not as much as many people. The fact is, Ted has played it too close to the vest - NOT maximizing the cap as much as he could have and arguably should have. There is limited cap space, yeah, but there are a lot of creative ways to stretch that which the Packers don't really do much of.

So all in all, it's easy to defend a GM who has brought us so many years of being near the top, but for the reasons I have stated, I don't buy the "stellar" thing. I don't even buy "above average". Ted has made a reputation based on benefiting from the greatness of Aaron Rodgers.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



A. The article was about TT's skill in the draft, and had nothing to do with free agency or his overall ability as a GM. The "but he doesn't go after FA's" argument doesn't have any relevance in this context.

B. The "without Aaron Rodgers..." trope is a tired logical fallacy. If you take away every GM's best pick/franchise QB, they look a lot worse. Do you think Belichick gets to 5 superbowls without Brady? How many does SF win without Montana? We can play the what if game all day, but the truth is nobody knows.

Before I get the stock "But everyone knew Rodgers was going to be a HOF QB, it was an easy pick" rebutal, spare yourself the trouble. You know this is a logical fallacy as well. Had every team known Rodgers was going to be as good as he is, one of the 23 teams ahead of the Packers in the draft would have picked him. No team passes on a surefire franchise QB in the draft. So why wasn't Rodgers picked sooner? It's simple, with hindsight, of course the pick was obviously the right choice, but GMs across the league have to make educated guesses, they don't get the benefit of hindsight that armchair fantasy GM's
do while retrospectively grading drafts.
blank
steveishere
8 years ago

I hadn't followed this thread until just now. It seemed to be the only game in town.

I find it interesting that there is so much negativity toward uffda udfa - in this thread anyway. In some other ones, I could understand why. Saying he ruined the thread - this one anyway - is a bit over the top. The 2nd or 3rd post, I think - his first in this thread - was an intelligent rebuttal to a very shaky premise - that Ted Thompson is all that special as a GM or even as a drafter - removing from discussion the whole aspect that he stubbornly refuses to go after other teams' free agents to any significant degree. Beyond that, it seems to me, the "ruination" has been condemnation of uffda udfa and his responding to it.

In this particular case, I have to side with the basic premise of uffda udfa. One line of his really stands out. I paraphrase: "Where would Ted's teams be without Aaron Rodgers?" A big hell yeah to that!

It could easily be argued that drafting the best QB in the history of the world makes Ted a "stellar" drafter. It could just as easily be argued that he got lucky. It was a fairly obvious move at the time to draft a QB who had been speculated to have a 50/50 chance of being the overall number one pick when he was still there 20 or so picks later and Favre getting on in years - who knew he would remain good for so long. As uffda udfa said, you look at the team minus Aaron Rodgers, and you get a whole other picture - mediocre comes to mind rather than stellar.

And then there's the one Super Bowl won thing ...... I would suggest that if the GM had Aaron Rodgers and did a stellar or even above average job of building a team around him, we would have an all out dynasty - half a dozen or so SB wins in the years up to now with Rodgers as starter.

What I will give Ted credit for is that he is an excellent finder of UDFAs. The Packers have been way above average at finding and using them. They better be, because a LOT of those stellar draft picks have kinda fallen flat.

Many will also give Ted credit for keeping the Packers out of "cap hell" as the Niners and a few other teams over the years have ended up. I will give him limited positivity here, but not as much as many people. The fact is, Ted has played it too close to the vest - NOT maximizing the cap as much as he could have and arguably should have. There is limited cap space, yeah, but there are a lot of creative ways to stretch that which the Packers don't really do much of.

So all in all, it's easy to defend a GM who has brought us so many years of being near the top, but for the reasons I have stated, I don't buy the "stellar" thing. I don't even buy "above average". Ted has made a reputation based on benefiting from the greatness of Aaron Rodgers.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



Aaron Rodgers was no "can't miss" prospect. How many teams that needed QBs passed on him? Why didn't any of those teams offer a fortune to trade up with GB and take him? This "well he was a no brainer pick" needs to stop, that is just using hindsight. All those teams that badly needed a QB let him walk yet this team that had a Hall of Fame QB and was in what most of you would call "win now mode" didn't try and make the team better for him they looked to the future and took the guy those other teams didn't even like. That is not luck it's balls.

The dynasty mess is a joke. We could have Rodgers with an all pro-bowl defense and still not have a dynasty. It's that hard to win in this league. You are also ignoring that Rodgers has played his part in some of our playoff exits. He's the best QB in the league but the gap between him and other QBs is not as large as you are making it out to be. I'm not saying he's the reason we haven't won more titles but you are making it seem like he's went out there and balled out every playoff game while the defense gave up 50 points and just screwed him over. If we play a playoff game and Rodgers plays bad and the defense plays bad it's not just the defenses fault it's the teams fault and that has been the case a few times. We also have won playoff games where Rodgers played more like your average level QB or even worse.

You can't look at the team minus Aaron Rodgers because the team is built around Aaron Rodgers. You think if we never drafted Rodgers the team is built exactly the same? It's a pointless question. No doubt some of the decisions that have been made haven't been the best but show me 1 GM that hasn't made bad decisions. Like I've said before if Ted isn't "above average" that mans about half the league is better than him. So who are all these GMs that are so much better or are you comparing him to some hypothetical GM that only makes the right decisions?
luigis
8 years ago
Let's say you have to shoot some cans, you shoot 15 of 50 cans.
Is this good? Is this goood? Is this terrible?
The answer is that it depends.

Any article analyzing how good a GM is from his picks is plain BS and it doesn't have any validity. You have to compare GMs based on what they did with each draft class and how they did in general.

Which position you pick, what is available, what you pick and what the other GMs picked after you matters if you want to really know if someone is good.

So far I haven't seen such an article.

My feeling is that compared to the other GMs Ted is in the top 10. He has had very good and very bad drafts, quite curiously his two best drafts in my opinion were the ones before the Superbowl.
He picked Jordy, Cobb, he also picked Harrell and Alex Green. This happens with all the GMs no one has a perfect record.

I've been studying the draft for a long time and one thing that is really curious is how bad the Raiders have drafted. I think any of us could have done a better job. We can conclude the Raiders are probably the worst drafters in the last 10 years.

About Teddy there's never been a good article written about how he drafted, he was never compared to the other GMs, ridiculous. So let's keep things in perspective.

Luis
uffda udfa
8 years ago

Its not just about having everyone agree. Several of us have tried to start different discussions in this thread with him but they have been ignored so he can just keep ranting about some editor using the word stellar. We could have had a good discussion on whether Ted is a good drafter or a bad drafter or even what it means to be a good drafter from page 1. We even tried to get a definition of what should be considered a stellar drafter. We didnt have those discussions though did we? Instead we just get paragraphs of bitching about the word stellar and Ted Thompson lovers and insults directed toward TT. Hence a thread with some good potential for discussion has indeed been "ruined"

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



It's good to know how much I'm needed here. Discussions of any relevance can't take place unless I participate. Outstanding.

How quaint that I'm still getting blasted for what I haven't responded to, totally dismissing the FACT you, yourself, have dismissed SEVERAL questions posed by me... most of which could've been answered by a simple YES or NO. The answers aren't forthcoming because the last thing in the world most of you want is to examine your false and wrongly held opinions that you so desperately need others to validate.

I've now tired of Barfarn...he's all style and no substance. My goodness. Trype.

Nothing has been "ruined" except the safe little word you try to cling to where Ted Thompson is some master drafter which is not the case. I think there's a reason nobody chose to grade any of his drafts because if they were all stellar that would've been the first thing done here because the bloodthirsty cult crowd would've used it to validate their opinion. Sadly, it isn't there for them and they know that so one must turn to ME as the subject because there is nothing there for them to defend their false belief. Hammer uffda! Hammer him! Lynch him. That guy is so wrong. Really? Nah.

This thread has been derailed by truth and nothing more. The false train fell off the tracks when I started posing you questions regarding the actual topic. You wanted to ask questions that had nothing to do with my statements because my statements were correct.
Ted Thompson is not a stellar drafter and you know that. Go ahead and ask again who is more stellar. That wasn't the articles point. It was singular. The article itself didn't compare TT. It, in a vacuum, made proclamations that were ridiculous beyond the editor's title.

Delusion. Strong. Koolaid is good, though. Hard to resist.






UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


Barfarn
8 years ago

I wouldn't consider Ted Thompson "stellar." Ozzie Newsome is stellar when it comes to the draft. John Schneider is stellar when it comes to the draft. I would put Thompson on a rung below those GMs. He has failed to fix our defense for years and for that I cannot in good conscience consider him "stellar."

Udffa, this is just sheer curiosity on my part, which GMs do you have ranked ahead of Ted?

Originally Posted by: Bigbyfan 



Two good GM picks Bigby; But IMHO neither is as good as TT:

Ozzie-Is a great drafter and provides a nice 10 year comparative data base and ON is the only guy who surpasses Ted Thompson on Comp Picks. Balt’s average draft position is slightly lower than Pack; but it is negligible [about ½ spot per yr] and in the last 10 years each team has picked in front of the other 5 times.

Each drafted two studs: Ngata/Yanda to CM3/AR

But, last year Mosely’s pro bowl ended a 5 year drought for Ozzie, not one player from drafts 2009-2013 made one. Overall Qzzie’s picks have had 6 different players named to PB 17 times; Ted Thompson 9 players; 20 times. Ozzie has drafted 30 different guys that became primary starters for 97 seasons and Ted Thompson 34 for 98. [All #’s from Profootball-reference].

All in all pretty close! Despite the #’s, which I believe give Ted Thompson as light edge, if it’s eventually decided ON is the best and Ted Thompson is right there; then by definition Ted Thompson is “STELLAR!”

I have only one criticism of ON’s drafting and that is he doesn’t devalue a player enough over character risks. He obviously assumes Harbaugh and the vets will keep them in line.

Schneider, admittedly from 2010-2014 has overall drafted better than TT. BUT: (1) he’s been drafting much higher than Ted Thompson on average; and (2) JS left GB right before 2010 draft. 99.9% of JS’s knowledge of 2010 draftable players came from the work of Ted Thompson and his scouting dept. In 2011, probably 60-75% of JS’s knowledge of players came from GB and maybe 20-30% in 2012. Once we adjust for draft position and JS scouting players w/o TT’s help, it is clear Ted Thompson is the better drafter; though in fairness the sample size is small and we really don’t fully know how some of these guys drafted in 2013-14 will turn out.

I dont think JS will last long term like ON and TT. I could not believe he stated [trying to justify that insane trade to NO] that he only has 16 players ranked w/ a 1st round grade. It is stupid to reveal details of a drafter’s most prized possession [His Board]; this and other run of the mouth behaviors show JS has some serious psychological issues. Moreover, he’s a degenerate gambler GM like Baalke.
steveishere
8 years ago

It's good to know how much I'm needed here. Discussions of any relevance can't take place unless I participate. Outstanding.

How quaint that I'm still getting blasted for what I haven't responded to, totally dismissing the FACT you, yourself, have dismissed SEVERAL questions posed by me... most of which could've been answered by a simple YES or NO. The answers aren't forthcoming because the last thing in the world most of you want is to examine your false and wrongly held opinions that you so desperately need others to validate.

I've now tired of Barfarn...he's all style and no substance. My goodness. Trype.

Nothing has been "ruined" except the safe little word you try to cling to where Ted Thompson is some master drafter which is not the case. I think there's a reason nobody chose to grade any of his drafts because if they were all stellar that would've been the first thing done here because the bloodthirsty cult crowd would've used it to validate their opinion. Sadly, it isn't there for them and they know that so one must turn to ME as the subject because there is nothing there for them to defend their false belief. Hammer uffda! Hammer him! Lynch him. That guy is so wrong. Really? Nah.

This thread has been derailed by truth and nothing more. The false train fell off the tracks when I started posing you questions regarding the actual topic. You wanted to ask questions that had nothing to do with my statements because my statements were correct.

Ted Thompson is not a stellar drafter and you know that. Go ahead and ask again who is more stellar. That wasn't the articles point. It was singular. The article itself didn't compare TT. It, in a vacuum, made proclamations that were ridiculous beyond the editor's title.

Delusion. Strong. Koolaid is good, though. Hard to resist.





Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 


Lol believe what you want I guess. Maybe it's not people clinging to their beliefs as much as you being utterly unconvincing. So far really the only thing you've shown is the author wrote a poor article and somebody made a sensational headline for it. Congrats I guess. People keep wanting to actually discuss Ted Thompson as a GM but you've ignored it then proclaimed that you proved Ted Thompson is bad. Not buying that is supposed to = drinking koolaid..... give me a break lol. 🤔 Talk about delusion
uffda udfa
8 years ago
You do realize the first post in this thread was a direct commentary based off the article. That is what I responded to. As if that article was validation that Ted Thompson is great. I balk at that notion and responded.

I don't think Ted Thompson is terrible. I think he is misperceived by Packers nation and beyond. He's a little above average. Give any of the other 31 teams Aaron Rodgers and let's see what you think of that GM.

It's mind boggling how one guy could ask about how a drafter could be stellar or even good when he's failed to build a defense, or why it even needed to be built in the first place if he was. Those are fair questions that go unanswered here all the time. He hit on a QB who fell when we had a HOF waffling QB who could've walked out at any moment. The praise received for making that pick is beyond ridiculous and the justifications I read are even worse.
Ted Thompson can't build a D...the resources he's dumped into it are plentiful. Results...minimal. Honestly, how can he be great if he can't build a defense...how many years has he been here? One of the guys who made us great was Cullen Jenkins...not his guy. We win the SB and Hawk gets money and Cullen goes packing.

This guy has rolled into seasons with defenses we KNEW were going to be terrible. He just seems to wish his way to better. Just counting on that 2nd year jump and offseason program...the same thing EVERY other franchise experiences. It's not like the 2nd year jump is a Packer trademarked thing. Each team has it. We seem to hail it like some uniquely Green Bay thing that will magically make us better. D is not good year after year but we win division after division. Why? Aaron Rodgers. We all know that but can't seem to admit it when judging TT. Objectivity just disappears. He's great because we win divisions. Look at what he's done...every single move and analyze it and return and tell me he's as wonderful you thought he was before you bothered to look. You're a bunch of end justify the means kind of thinkers. The means ain't been that great you just don't want to look.
UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (11h) : Chase Young to sign $13M contract with Saints
Zero2Cool (11h) : Yosh to Panthers what noooo. Wait he didn't do crap
wpr (18-Mar) : I say that he is technically HER BIL as he married her sister. I checked it out, he's considered my BIL as well. Sad.
Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : wpr, I assume its your BIL via marriage to your wife? If so, I can figure out where the smarts in the family went ;)
wpr (18-Mar) : Mucky my B-I-L is Bare Stupid. I could write a book.
Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : As a teenager in Rockford IL I would get heckled by adults in public for wearing GB gear
Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : if you think the online ones are bad, try *living amongst* them
Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : Never doubt wprs loyalty. Poor guy is surrounded by Bears fans in Northern IL
wpr (17-Mar) : pass Martha. Thanks for the invite though.
Martha Careful (17-Mar) : blog * as the same ugly Illinois colors were adopted by the Baer
Martha Careful (17-Mar) : WPR, perhaps you should be joining the Bears fans blog has the same ugly Illinois colors were adopted by the Bears
Mucky Tundra (17-Mar) : Ah a fellow U of Illinois hater. I can respect that though I imagine it's for different reasons
Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : BTW. I didn't catch the game. I just hate Illinois.
Mucky Tundra (17-Mar) : They're your Big Ten Chumps and you will like it!
Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : No, not for the record. Referee's handled that BS. Orange team was trash ass
Mucky Tundra (17-Mar) : *Your* Big Ten Chumps for the record
Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : No, not Big Ten Champs. IL is big ten CHUMPS
wpr (17-Mar) : Big Ten Champs
wpr (17-Mar) : !!!
wpr (17-Mar) : INI
wpr (17-Mar) : ILL
Martha Careful (17-Mar) : Wisconsin with an outstanding on in the men’s Big Ten basketball tournament. Let’s hope it continues in the NCAAs
Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : Almost like taking QB in 2020 even if you don't need one is good move.
Mucky Tundra (16-Mar) : 2021 QB Draft class looking like a real clunker
Mucky Tundra (16-Mar) : A conditional 6th rounder? I remember Bears fans arguing they'd get a day 2 pick at worst lol
dfosterf (16-Mar) : So I got the no extension part right and the have to wait on the CW physical wrong
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Bears are trading Justin Fields for a 2025 6th-round pick that goes to a 4th-round pick based on playtime, per sources.
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Former Packer Jarrett Bush opens Wisconsin’s first blow dry bar in Green Bay
dfosterf (16-Mar) : If the Bears are not doing a deal with Washington, they also cannot trade Fields until Williams physical with them. All hail Caleb Williams!
dfosterf (16-Mar) : The talent is undeniable, but the (advertised) haul is obscene.
dfosterf (16-Mar) : If the Bears are cutting a deal with the Commanders, in either scenario, cannot happen until williams passes a Commanders physical
dfosterf (16-Mar) : My guess is no to the Fields extension, but yes to the trade back with the Commanders.
dhazer (15-Mar) : I think the Bears do a Love extension and they will trade out of the 1st pick and take the haul
Martha Careful (15-Mar) : that might make sense
Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Justin Fields to Steelers?
Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Kenny Pickett. Eagles. Done.
Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : They can claim best two WR tandem.
Mucky Tundra (15-Mar) : Aaron Donald retiring
dhazer (15-Mar) : Campbell signing with 49ers
dhazer (15-Mar) : I love how the Bear Fans are now claiming they have the best skill players in the NFC North lol
Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Vikings made a move to get a 2nd first round pick
Mucky Tundra (15-Mar) : That's a not a bad deal for the Bears
Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Bears have traded for WR Keenan Allen sending Chargers a fourth rounder.
Martha Careful (15-Mar) : *signs
Martha Careful (14-Mar) : MLB Devon White science with the Eagles
Mucky Tundra (14-Mar) : But that was before FA started
Mucky Tundra (14-Mar) : Dhaze, I thought Kurls would be their #1 target when I read that he was an Amos comp (jack of all trades guy)
dhazer (14-Mar) : I would like to see the Packers target 2 more FA still available Kamren Curl Safety and Chase Young edge
Martha Careful (14-Mar) : wow...didn't see that coming
Zero2Cool (14-Mar) : AJ Dillon re-signing with Packers.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

18-Mar / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

16-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

16-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

15-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

15-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

14-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

14-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

14-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

13-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

13-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

13-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

13-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.