Favre-loving Journal Sentinel sports writer tries to NAIL Ted Thompson in interview, FAILS

We all know how bad the plague was that swept the plains of Wisconsin. It divided the state in half at it's peak and then as time went on it was suffocated down and now all that remains is a tiny fringe sect. Oh yes, the Favre plague is still with us to this very day. We may never see the day that the state finally takes its immunization and destroy the virus.

Now all that is left is a tiny group of Ted Thompson haters that will stop at nothing to make a fool out of him and prove themselves correct. The majority of these people are Wisconsin sports writers who, of course, know everything there is to know about sports and do their very best to showcase this fact to the world. Not in a long time has there been an example of such bias, such disdain, such loathing of every fiber of Ted Thompson's being, that I just had no choice but to expose the fool for what he is: a Favreian traitor. This fool, under the guise of an easy online Q&A session, attempts to lure TT into a trap where the questioneer can jump in after a bad answer and yell, "GOT YA!" and then push him to the ground and kick him in the nuts. TT was having none of it.

Behold the maleficence:

The first two questions are fluff, "You're thoughts on the season? Successful season or no?" and TT responded accordingly with fluff answers.

Then, on question number four the writer exposes himself. Let's dissect the entire question right here, right now:

Q: But obviously the offensive line was affected by the situation at left tackle, with Chad Clifton getting hurt and Daryn Colledge and T.J. Lang having to play there. When you put together your 53-man roster, you were OK with Colledge backing up an aging Clifton, who hadn't started all 16 games since 2007 and was coming off four surgeries?

See how he did that? "you were OK with Colledge backing up an aging Clifton, who hadn't started all 16 games since 2007 and was coming off four surgeries?" This guy thinks he's Katie Couric trying to expose a scandal at the nearest bank, but he at least tries to mask his intentions at first. I would say this question was a gentle nudging and most people would not have noticed. Or cared. But I notice and care about many things.

Ted's answer?: A. Well, that was one of the plans. The thing that I think is overlooked sometimes is you can't have a left tackle ready to play that's sitting on the bench in the NFL. There's not that many of them. There's not 32 of them. We happen to have one and we actually have a couple of young guys, including T.J. Lang, that we think can play out there. But when you get hurt at a position as valuable as left tackle, you're going to take some lumps. Now, we've done that in the past and we've been able to play our way through it and win some games. We struggled a little bit more this year.

BOOM, HEADSHOT. SIT DOWN SON, YOU JUST GOT OWNED.

Q. But Colledge seemed to be your Plan A. . . .

What the hell is wrong with this idiot? "But, but, but, but!!..." He's so intent on proving himself right that he just can't accept the beautifully painted canvas of words in front of him that TT masterfully crafted.

Q. You didn't think you could find some sort of veteran who could do better than Colledge?

Wow. This guy isn't just beating the shit out of a dead horse, he's going into full Hartigan on the Yellow Bastard mode. He's pounding this thing into the ground and can't accept "no" for an answer.

A. Obviously not.

Answers like these are why I love Ted Thompson. Ask him a stupid question and expose your bias, then he'll treat you as you should be treated. Like a child.

Q. Who are the young guys that you think can play left tackle?

A. We think T.J. can.

Q. You do?

WTF???? YOU DO?!?! YOU MORON TJ CAN'T PLAY, PUT IN GIACOMINI!!! I can just see this fool raising his eyebrow and scoffing, "Glegch! I know what it takes to be a starting left tackle in the NFL because of my years and years of experience playing in the league and my years of being a coach and my years of being a GM. Just kidding, I'm just a sports writer. Trick!"

Q. You said it before, you thought maybe the line didn't play as well as it could have. Do you think those guys are coached up well enough?

Q. Because this isn't just a one-year problem. The struggles on the line have been going on for at least three years. These are the players you put in place. It seems like it's either the players or the coaching.

Q. Are you actively trying to re-sign any of your unrestricted free agents?

Q. Did the addition of Tauscher and running back Ahman Green - and their contributions in the locker room - open your eyes a little bit more to the value of veteran players?

"Let's face it Ted. You're really stupid and I'm really smart, so sit here and listen to me while I lecture you on the importance of coaching your players, signing your free agents and not having 53 rookies on a team. Do you understand, Ted? Is this getting through to you?"

Who does this? "open your eyes a little bit more to the value of veteran players?" Oh, you must mean veterans like Donald Driver, Chad Clifton, Al Harris, Nick Barnett, Brandon Chillar, Cullen Jenkins, Ryan Pickett and Charles Woodson. Those kinds of veterans? This fool is so blinded by his hate for Thompson and his love for Brett Favre that he has no choice but to ask stupid questions that would get normal people fired.

He really does think these are good questions, and he really does think he knows more than Ted Thompson. Why else would he be talking down to him like this and giving a hint of mockery in almost every one of his questions? We are entering Favre Acolyte territory here, folks.

Q. What's the deal with right tackle Breno Giacomini? He's been on the roster for two years, has barely been active. Doesn't he almost have to start next season to validate you holding a roster spot for him?

Good god. You'd expect to see questions beginning "What's the deal with..." coming from some dude with a blog that doesn't really care about professionalism or answer quality or not looking like a complete douche.

A. (laughing) No, Breno's a good player and he's a good teammate and all that sort of stuff. You know, as you evolve in the NFL eventually you're going to have to go out there and sink or swim, and we're going to ask a lot of our guys, and he's going to be one of them.

Q. So you think he can play in this league?

Unreal. That's the third time in the same interview that he's followed up a Thompson answer with a "REALLY? You can't be serious!" Just how stupid do you have to be keep walking into the same wall over and over again. Pretty stupid.

Q. Charles Woodson questioned the team's mentality for the playoff game against Arizona. Did you agree with him? Did you think the team was overconfident?

Q. What happened to the defense in that game?

Q. It wasn't like the Cardinals were a new opponent. You knew the personnel and the scheme; do you think there was a problem with the game plan?

Q. So you don't know yet if it was the players or the scheme?

Q. Why were other teams able to pressure Brett Favre and Kurt Warner and the Packers weren't? Between the lack of pressure and coverage issues in the secondary, it was almost like 2008 all over again but with a different scheme.

"Woodson, a free agent signing I love to ignore, said blah blah. What's up with the crappy defense? The Cardinals suck! How could you not beat them!?!? It was obviously the coaching, right? It was McCarthy's fault, right? You do realize the defense was actually worse than last year don't you, Ted? Ted???"

After the previous question Ted Thompson goes into coast mode. 16 of the next 18 answers are two sentences or fewer. TWO SENTENCES.

Q. Can you explain the decision to put cornerback Pat Lee on injured reserve before the season?

A. He was injured.

See? Do you see what happens, Professional Sports Writer for the Journal Sentinel, when you ask stupid questions and put down the person you're interviewing? They tune you out and in turn the readers you propagate to tune you out.

Q. But he could have played at some point, right?

Q. So you think the game is important to him?

Q. Do you think you adequately staffed the secondary?

Q. You claimed Smith when he was cut by the St. Louis Rams; did that signify you made a mistake in releasing him?

Q. Do you regret cutting him?

Q. ...If you didn't think he could play in August, why could he play in November?

Q. Do you want linebacker Aaron Kampman back?

As terrible as this series as questions has been, Professional Sports Writer for the Journal Sentinel tops the entire Q&A session with possibly the most loaded question in the history of sports.

Q. What's the biggest regret you have during your tenure?

A. Oh. (Didn't answer).

Really. REALLY? You really asked him that question? What's your biggest regret? Are you Oprah? Are Ted Thompson's free spirited college days coming back to haunt him? Next time ask him what his greatest fears are and if he wants to travel the world or not.

This last question was a pretty obvious attempt to bait him into a Favre comment. You can just feel the hatred that this guy has for Thompson through this whole interview. TT was most likely wearing a mask and some scrubs because this guy is foaming at the mouth. He has journalistic-rabies. I think it may be fatal.

Greg A. Bedard is this fool's name. Send him many nasty emails full of big words.

Peter King is smart and handsome

Normally I would not read Sports Illustrated because I have disassociated myself with the magazine format. But this happened to be on the webnets so I quickly devoured it with my piercing retinas. Peter King is apparently some sort of writer and he writes about sports and things, so he made the annual list of players he likes more than others and calls it his All-Pro team. He opens with the typical establishment dribble about the formula he uses to calculate his picks and so on until we finally actually get to the picks. And as soon as my eyes glazed upon his first pick for his "All-Pro" team, disgust took hold of my body like it rarely ever does.

Offense

WR Vincent Jackson, San Diego.
He's very slightly more consistent and just as game-breaking as Andre Johnson.

I'll just repeat that line for you: He's very slightly more consistent and just as game-breaking as Andre F. Johnson. Either Peter is getting a little nookie from VJ on the side, or he's just plain stupid, and I have it on good authority that Peter King is a eunuch, so I'm siding on the stupid area. Andre Johnson. Andre "Leads the League in Receiving Yards"Johnson. That Andre Johnson. I'm sure Peter King did a quick check of the stat sheet before doing this pick, right? No need to double check.

Andre Johnson: 101 rec. 1569 yards / 98.1 yards per game / 9TD

Vincent Jackson: 68 rec. 1167 yards / 77.8 yards per game / 9TD

Even with a quick glance at the numbers or even from watching a 10 second clip of Andre Johnson playing the game of football, we can clearly see that he is the best receiver in the league and Peter King is a typical retarded troglodyte establishment sports writer who picks players he "likes" or "feels good about" over players who are much more incredibly productive. It's like baseball season all over again.

Just take a look at his first phrase, "He's very slightly more consistent..." How do you even think something like that if you're not just blatantly lying or not miming Sloth. I could go further and look at the game logs of each individual game and find out that Johnson only had two games where he had less than 4 receptions(2 rec against Oakland and 2 rec against San Francisco), while Vincent Jackson just averaged 4.5 receptions per game and had twelve games of 5 receptions or fewer. Johnson had six games of 8+ receptions including three games where he had ridiculous 10+ receptions - of which Jackson had zero.

So we are left with the conclusion that Vincent Jackson is slightly more consistently bad than Andre Johnson and that Peter King lost his eyesight at the tender age of 34, and has been forever cursed into making random guesses of which players are good based on the beautiful painted oral canvases crafted by Joe Buck's velvety cords.

On the other hand...

Executive
Ted Thompson, G.B.

This has to go back to his faith in Aaron Rodgers in June 2008, when Brett Favre wanted to come back and Thompson said no. But recent drafts of Greg Jennings and Clay Matthews, and the free-agent signing of Charles Woodson hit its zenith this year.

Alright, he's not so bad.

Mike McCarthy and the rising opposition

With the pathetic display of incompetence in Tampa Bay on Sunday there has been more and more anger directed at my boy Mike McCarthy. Yes - My boy. McCarthy is a buffoon, they say - a hack who never would have been hired had Ted Thompson not come calling looking for his own personal Yes Man to do exactly as he pleases. Well, friends. It's time for some serious analysis.

When McCarthy took over this team it was in the midst of a train wreck. The Packers had just finished a 4-12 season where their best player threw 29 INTs and had easily the worst year of his career(I'm talking about Brett Favre, by the way). Ted Thompson finally rid us of the great evil that was Mike Sherman and in walked the new Mike.

Just look at some of the names on this 2006 roster - McCarthy's first season: Koren Robinson, Samkon Gado, Vernand Morency, Noah Herron, Shaun Bodiford, Carlyle Holiday, Brandon Miree, Chris Francies, Ben Taylor, Jason Hunter, Kenderick Allen and - best of all - Robert Ferguson. Do you think any of those players could've made it on the Packers squad out of training camp this season? That would be a large "negative". This is the team of scrubs with a QB that everyone wanted to retire after his awful 2005 season - I remember, I was there - and a rookie coach.

McCarthy's first season saw immediate improvement. Sherman had possibly the worst year of coaching in the history coaching in 2005. Favre didn't care, Sherman maybe, possibly cared, but he was too busy doing Cellcom commercials and looking like a marshmellow to show up on Sundays. The 2005 Packers were projected at right around 7-9 based on their point differential(298 scored / 344 allowed / -46 diff) and they finished 4-12. Three wins worse than was warranted. Could that be coaching? Maybe.

The 2006 Packers point differential put them about one win worse than the 2005 team at 6-10. Of course, they finished 8-8 and McCarthy was looked at as a possible rising star along with Sean Payton. So how could McCarthy take basically the same terrible team and make them four wins better? How did he get Favre to cut his interceptions by ELEVEN in one season? Coaching? Maybe

The 2007 Packers were an unstoppable force, going 13-3 and going to the NFC title game. Based on point diff once again, they were at 11.5-4.5. So once again they performed better than the stats would dictate. It was a perfect blend of Ted Thompson's draft picks being in second and third years and now stepping up, Favre having one of the best years of his career, and McCarthy coaching his way to being the likely choice for Coach of the Year had Bill Belicheck and the Patriots not gone 16-0 and ruined everything.

2008 turned out to be a wasted season but the numbers show they were a 9-7 team. Much like this season the talent is there(should be 5-3, maybe even 6-2) but the record isn't showing it. Could it be coaching? How can you go from being almost Coach of the Year to being a complete football illiterate? You can't. My boy hasn't forgotten how to coach(see: Aaron Rodgers) and he hasn't lost the team, contrary to what the TT haters want to believe.

But the Packers do seem to have lost the mental toughness they had in '06 and '07. '06 where they started 1-4 and where they won their final four games. '07 where they won in Kansas City and at Mile High back to back weeks. You can't lose something like that just by losing Brett Favre, can you? I hope not or we are all doomed. Can you coach toughness? I'd think having Kevin Greene screaming and headbutting people on the sidelines in between calling plays would add to the toughness factor a bit more.

Something is amiss, but as of now I can't say it is McCarthy. We will let the final eight games play out before coming to a decision.

Ted Thompson and the Duel of Fates

Hello folks. The blog is not dead, contrary to popular opinion. In fact, it is currently in a revitalization period and we have yet to reach our peak. But there will be no giggling children metaphors in this post, oh no. If I may for a minute or two, my friends, it's time to get serious. Srsly. Super Srsrsrlslrly.

Do we or do we not trust Ted Thompson? There has been an incredible debate lately, even more than usual, on the topic of TT: his competence, intelligence, drafting decisions, football knowledge and so on in that fashion until he is stripped of every fiber of his humanity. There has also been a great slip in confidence in the pro-TT community. Myself and the Baron consider ourselves to be some of the original members of the pro-TT crowd - we liked TT before it was in style.

I will not try to persuade the many TT haters that are out there - they are beyond help as their blind hatred of a GM prevents them from being fans of the team. Of course, that's not the way they see it. To themselves, they are purists standing on principle and becoming martyrs for their childhood team as the barbarians inside Lambeau wreak havoc and turn it into something unrecognizable: 3-4 defense? Disgusting! Non-Brett Favre at QB? Preposterous! Great passing game complimented by the running game? You don't know football.

There are extremists, no doubt, within the Packer Allegiance. To deny this would be lying, and this blog was founded on truth. Now, the true Packer fans among us have done our very best to oust the traitors and form a new coalition of fandom around Aaron Rodgers, but at nearly every turn we are haunted by the soul of Brett Favre. For every common-sense fan preaching the stat book sermon to the congregation there is at least five Favre acolytes who will stop at nothing except to see Curly Lambeau on his knees in destitution.

The Favre acolytes hate Ted Thompson. That is the simplest explanation there is. They have been so blinded by seventeen years of servitude to their master that anything outside of their comfort setting - that is, whatever Brett Favre wants - boils the pot of rage inside of them like Mount Vesuvius getting ready to unleash it's vengance onto Pompeii. Nothing calms their anger and certainly nothing will change their mind.

So does TT warrant all of the hatred? Now that I have sufficiently broken down the hate factor it is time for even more breaking of things in a downward motion. TT has as good a draft history as any GM in the league. He has drafted a premier player at most positions: Rodgers QB, Jolly DE, Jennings WR, Raji DT, Finley TE, Crosby K, Matthews LB, Spitz C and so on. These players are the core of the team and they are all TT draft picks. We have him to thank for putting a very good team together that will be good to great for the next 5+ years.

The acolytes want nothing more than to see TT gone, and most of them view McCarthy unfavorably as well - not because he is a bad coach, but because he is TT's guy. They claim he ran Favre out of town while sitting on his golden throne of cheese and then going swimming through the $20mill in salary cap money like Scrooge McDuck. Favre, they claim, wanted nothing more than to play for the Packers for the rest of his career. TT drove out a Wisconsin hero, and in doing so became it's worst villain. This through the eyes of the uncleansed.

In reality TT has made very solid pickups in Chuck Woodson(CHARLES FREAKING WOODSON!!!!), Ryan Pickett, Brandon Chillar and Ryan Grant. He does not sit on the money, he doesn't need to spend most of it because there is already a very good core of players and he doesn't need to go get anyone. Now, we'll have an uncapped offseason where teams will be spending like Michael Jackson at a fresh baby market and TT knows this. We are positioned for uncertainty in case a deal gets pushed off or something in that nature.

Moreso in reality is the fact that Favre wanted out of Green Bay after 2007 and the only way he could think to do that was retire - because he was too arrogant to ask for his release or a trade. He knew TT would not just outright release Favre after the amazing year he just had because it would be off with his head, so to speak. I think Favre wanted to play for the Queens the whole time and this season is a culmination of a 2+ year process that finally saw him land in Minnesota, home of the Meager. But enough of what I think, even though those who are in the know know that I am right.

The deeds are done and most have moved on, but this coming Sunday's game will be the final battle of the pro-TT and anti-TT movements. Aaron Rodgers must cement his place and finally beat Favre in front of the Lambeau's 70,000 man army. Rodgers, in the pre-game coin flip ceremony, will not shake hands with Favre but will instead show off his green #4 jersey that he is sporting - an obvious shot at Favre. Then Rodgers will rip it off Hulk Hogen-style and revealed will be the most glorious color of white your eyes could ever see, all trapped inside of the number Twelve. Favre, unable to look away, will immediately drop to his knees and weep like he did at his first retirement press conference. I will be laughing on my couch as I watch this unfold on Fox Television.

Packers 33
Queens 26

DRAFT DAY!!

Oh yes, it's Christmas II. Otherwise known as NFL Draft Day. I would take the day off from work if I had a job. It is one of the most sacred days of the Sporting Year. Right behind Opening Day for the Brewers. And maybe the Packers too. Those beloveds are like 1b.

So who will Ted Thompson aka THE GURU draft today? Well, I'm glad you asked. Because I know the answer....

..."With the 9th pick in the 2009 NFL Draft, the Green Bay Packers select.... BJ RAJI"

And that's how it's going down today. However, it should be said that if Raji is taken TT will be forced to trade down to no lower than 15. I must cover my beautiful bases here.

Punting for the New Age

FEAR NOT!!! We have not left you. After a delightful 29 day break we are back and more irrational than ever.

Let us start with the best news of all: Derrick Frost is no longer the Packer's punter. Do I need to say more? No, I do not. But I will anyways.

Derrick Frost was the worst punter I have ever seen punt the footing-ball. I've been yearning to find out why he is so awful during the games. According to Mike McCarthy Frost is awesome during practice, but as soon as he steps onto the game field his brain goes, "DURR DA DURR" and he turns into a David Beckham wannabe: "Do I drop the footing-ball and dribble it around by my feet? Should I even catch the snap? Why am I not playing rugby in Australia?" These are some of the things that go through Derrick Frost's head as he's getting ready to punt.

Why?

Well, I had to do some digging, but I may have found the reason. And by digging, I mean typing his name into Google.

RESULTS!!!:


I type in "Derrick Frost" and I get "chiodos" as a related search along with a bunch of awful pictures. So I think to myself, "Hmmm, self. Maybe this 'chiodos' has something to do with his mediocrity. Good thinking!"

I click on "chiodos" and much to my incredible dismay I stumbled upon the very reason that Derrick Frost fails at punting.

BEHOLD THE REASON:

"Tales of Ordinary Madness" What in the hell? This is madness, alright. Utter non-ordinary madness. How do you even live with yourself Derrick Frost? How do you continue to live a lie? We all know that you are a member of this... "sect"...

I don't even know what to say to you Derrick Frost. Ted Thompson had something to say to you after he found out about this little "chiodos" shenannigans: YOU FAIL. GOODBYE