I'm as big a Brett Favre fan as they come, but I was wondering why no one ever talks about the fact that although he is one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time, he is still subject to bonehead plays in big games. My concern is that Sherman and other coaches are afraid to step up and keep him focused and under control (ala Mike Holmgren) in the playoffs. He's a legend and he precedes Sherman and his staff and they know this is Favre's team. A huge talent like Favre and an outside element of control and discipline amounts to big success. Do you agree that this appears to be a problem and do you think Sherman is managing him correctly in the big games?
Also, if the Packers don't field a vastly improved defense this year
(which we are all wondering how) Thompson's legacy with the Packers will be
forever stained as the guy who blew the last year(s) with Favre.
Steve, St. Louis, MO
Harry says: Steve, no one mentions it because they act like they are blind or they think he's exempt from mistakes, which he is not. Like I have said before, Brett, when he doesn't have to be the man, he can be the man. But when he has to he seems to not get it done. Example: playoff games. People want to call him the greatest, but has he played like one of the greatest of all time? As for Mike and the coaching staff handling Favre … are you kidding? In front of the camera they might say the right things, but they won't call him out. When Sherman didn't make Favre attend minicamps, he gave him all the control he didn't have before.
Yes, I do agree with you, the reigns need to be pulled tighter. I don't think Ted Thompson can be the blame for anything until we see how the draft plays out, but then again, he and the Packers really didn't do anything to address the real needs of the defense in the off-season did they?
It's great to read your straight-up thoughts on this year's team as opposed to the "glamour report" we get from the web site. It seems as though the hot topic is how the team has mismanaged the draft and free agency. This is a trend with the Packers the past few seasons, so my question is, why is this team consistently without any cap money? Year after year it's the same story ¬- limited cap space. In today's era of free agency and players changing teams like underwear, organizations have to look not at just the year ahead, but a few years ahead and plan. It seems like the future planning has gone by the wayside and this team is in scramble mode each off-season. I look to who was in charge: Sherman. What are your thoughts?
Jason, Chandler, Ariz.
Harry says: Jason, they are without cap money because they have been wasting it on players that haven't gotten it done. Such as Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila. They Packers paid him too much money to just be a pass rusher. Mr. Hunt is a joke. Then they tied money up in the offensive tackles. How much money is that? Remember they paid on Jamal Reynolds and Joe Johnson after they left and that counts against the salary cap. I guess you have to really know talent and not think you know talent! Jason, there is a reason Mr. Sherman is just the coach now!
If your assessment of Green Bay's draft for 2005 proves true, and Jim Bates doesn't have the personnel to do the job, and believing that GM Ted Thompson is an astute judge of talent and is more aware of this than the rest of us, then what are the prospects for 2006 and 2007 defensive draft choices which could help rebuild the team within the time frame of Thompson's contract. How bad will free agency hurt us in 2006 and 2007? Goodbye, Mike Sherman!
David, LaCrosse, Wis.
Harry says: David, to be honest with you it's way too early to predict who will be around in the draft in 2006 and 2007. If a top collegiate player is injured this fall, he could suddenly be knocked to a free agent status. So be patient my man. As for free agency, I've got a better question: Who couldn't they afford to lose?
With what is happening with Cletidus Hunt? Will the Pack cut him? And if they do, will they use that money to sign Lance Schulters? It seems to me, the Pack would have been better off trading down in the draft and getting Matt Roth or Brodney Pool and then picking up Charlie Frye in the second round. But that's just one man's opinion.
Jason Anderson, Fargo, N.D.
Harry says: Jason, the Packers should cut Hunt, but they probably won't. If they cut him his money will be tied up, I believe, and it will still be on the book. I agree with you 100% that they should have gotten someone in the draft that is going to help them win NOW. And they can say Aaron Rodgers was the best available number 1 pick. But 23 other teams passed on Rodgers because they went with what they needed to make them better now. WE DIDN'T. I believe your opinion is very valid!
Editor's note: Submit questions for Harry Sydney to PackerReport.com managing editor Todd Korth at email@example.com. Sydney will answer questions each Friday on PackerReport.com.