Fire Matt LaFleur

[Poppa San]

Next you are on a plane and a couple is about to get separated? Give up your seat and don’t gloat over it!

Since many seats are priced differently, there are people that take advantage of this by purchasing a cheaper seat and then strongly urging someone gives up a seat they paid extra to get. Be it extra legroom or a window seat. Lots of videos showing the discussion especially when a child does not get to sit by parent.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Could be. A coach should have his team ready for a home game against a long-time competitor. At a minimum, the Packers need to execute well, meaning fewer penalties and no turnovers. If they play a clean game and lose, well it's because the opponent was better. I don't like it but can live with it.

I don't know what to think of penaties in the NFL anymore. Ever since the NFL started sleeping with the gambling rackets officiating has gotten worse and worse. I don't go by the penalty count in the box score. After the MN game where they absolutely refused to call a single one of at least 3 roughing penalties on Love and single-handedly gifted them the momentum changing drive after we legitimately shut it down THREE TIMES, I only put stock in the penalties I can actually see. People have always claimed games are fixed when things don't go their way and I've never bought into that, but over the past few years... I don't know anymore. I mean, just last week the ref literally threw a block for Miami! I

 

[milani]

I don't know what to think of penaties in the NFL anymore. Ever since the NFL started sleeping with the gambling rackets officiating has gotten worse and worse. I don't go by the penalty count in the box score. After the MN game where they absolutely refused to call a single one of at least 3 roughing penalties on Love and single-handedly gifted them the momentum changing drive after we legitimately shut it down THREE TIMES, I only put stock in the penalties I can actually see. People have always claimed games are fixed when things don't go their way and I've never bought into that, but over the past few years... I don't know anymore. I mean, just last week the ref literally threw a block for Miami! I

This year it is yellow yellow yellow. I mean look. Tampa Bay beats Dallas even with 12 penalties! I think they could start by getting rid of TNF and playing overseas. Stick to Sunday and Monday, except a couple Saturday games in WKs 16 and 17. Teams would be physically and mentally more consistent. And maybe the refs as well. And there are roughly 16 officiating crews. Tell me that all are as good as any one.

 

[Heyjoe4]

This year it is yellow yellow yellow. I mean look. Tampa Bay beats Dallas even with 12 penalties! I think they could start by getting rid of TNF and playing overseas. Stick to Sunday and Monday, except a couple Saturday games in WKs 16 and 17. Teams would be physically and mentally more consistent. And maybe the refs as well. And there are roughly 16 officiating crews. Tell me that all are as good as any one.

I agree with getting rid of the international games. TNF doesn't bother me that much. Problem is, in all these cases big $$$ are involved. The only way to get rid of international games is to put it in the next CBA. The league and the owners won't give up that revenue on their own.

 

[DoURant]

I don't know what to think of penaties in the NFL anymore. Ever since the NFL started sleeping with the gambling rackets officiating has gotten worse and worse. I don't go by the penalty count in the box score. After the MN game where they absolutely refused to call a single one of at least 3 roughing penalties on Love and single-handedly gifted them the momentum changing drive after we legitimately shut it down THREE TIMES, I only put stock in the penalties I can actually see. People have always claimed games are fixed when things don't go their way and I've never bought into that, but over the past few years... I don't know anymore. I mean, just last week the ref literally threw a block for Miami! I

I'm with you, especially on the gambling sites. As soon as you legalize gambling in anything, the odds for potential "cheating" increases.

It would be difficult to add challenging penalties, but I think it should be looked into, especially roughing the QB or other personal foul calls. Maybe give 1 penalty challenge per game, but as long as you win the challenge you get to challenge again. Holding and pass interference would be difficult to police/challenge, as there is a lot of hand fighting and contact that doesn't get called, but there are some pretty bad misses that have effected the outcomes of games, so it's definitely time to have an honest discussion on the phantom calls being allowed to be an unchecked part of the game.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I'm with you, especially on the gambling sites. As soon as you legalize gambling in anything, the odds for potential "cheating" increases.

It would be difficult to add challenging penalties, but I think it should be looked into, especially roughing the QB or other personal foul calls. Maybe give 1 penalty challenge per game, but as long as you win the challenge you get to challenge again. Holding and pass interference would be difficult to police/challenge, as there is a lot of hand fighting and contact that doesn't get called, but there are some pretty bad misses that have effected the outcomes of games, so it's definitely time to have an honest discussion on the phantom calls being allowed to be an unchecked part of the game.

Agreed D. The NFL could use a challenge system similar to MLB.

 

[OldSchool101]

I'm with you, especially on the gambling sites. As soon as you legalize gambling in anything, the odds for potential "cheating" increases.

It would be difficult to add challenging penalties, but I think it should be looked into, especially roughing the QB or other personal foul calls. Maybe give 1 penalty challenge per game, but as long as you win the challenge you get to challenge again. Holding and pass interference would be difficult to police/challenge, as there is a lot of hand fighting and contact that doesn't get called, but there are some pretty bad misses that have effected the outcomes of games, so it's definitely time to have an honest discussion on the phantom calls being allowed to be an unchecked part of the game.

Great idea. 1 flag challenge per game plus 1 more if the game goes past regulation. The challenge only counts if we lose it like normal. That would make us use it on a critical play like roughing the Passer or Punt return that brings back a 20 yard return and goes -10 the other direction (-30).

That or we’d use it in the waning minutes in a close game.

 

[DoURant]

Great idea. 1 flag challenge per game plus 1 more if the game goes past regulation. The challenge only counts if we lose it like normal. That would make us use it on a critical play like roughing the Passer or Punt return that brings back a 20 yard return and goes -10 the other direction (-30).

That or we’d use it in the waning minutes in a close game.

I think it would cut down on some of the "favoritism" calls some players/teams seem to get.

 

[adambr2]

Ok I will try to disagree better
But just for the record.. you are definitely wrong on that!

@adambr2
I will offer one small but of advice. I mean this in the most respectful way and it’s advice offered to me (because I needed it) from someone I respect highly and who was very kind and respectful to others. WE choose to be offended. YOU have every authority and power to decide to not be offended. You can even try it for 1 day and see if it’s not the best advice ever.
Next time someone passes you and you want to speed up? Don’t. Let them go. I actually leave my home 5-7 minutes early each day and look for a couple people to allow in front of me.


Next time someone enters a door or line at the same time? Signal them that they are first! Next you are on a plane and a couple is about to get separated? Give up your seat and don’t gloat over it!

People are watching every breath and every syllable is being taken note. I’ve had people chase me down in an Airport to tell me my actions were kind beyond anything they’ve seen. That’s the truth too. Be kind and generous to others with all your effort and time…and others will start to be kind back.

YOU choose to be offended and YOU choose not to be offended. YOU hold 100% control over that every day. It’s just that nobody told us to train ourselves for life. Life will lead to constant disappointment if you expect others to not offend you. I’m 100% positive on that and it’s some of the best advice you’ll have ever tried.

Just to be clear, I never found the “your inability to understand” to be offensive and it was never about being offended

I just don’t personally agree with approaching any discussion over subjective things from a place of “you’re wrong and I’m right”. On facts? Statistics? Sure. One can be right or wrong about facts. But I would say facts only make up a small part of our discussions.

When it comes to opinions, I have my own opinions (some that I feel more strongly about than others), but I have always found it to be more compatible to good discussion if approached with an open mind when discussing things that aren’t black and white, even if I don’t necessarily agree.

Sometimes I even learn things that way. For example, in this discussion I learned that Pete has called for Matt’s firing in articles (or at least suggested his seat should be among the hottest), which probably affects MLF’s attitude toward him, which is something I didn’t know before and adds some perspective for me on my opinion about it.

 

[OldSchool101]

Just to be clear, I never found the “your inability to understand” to be offensive and it was never about being offended

I just don’t personally agree with approaching any discussion over subjective things from a place of “you’re wrong and I’m right”. On facts? Statistics? Sure. One can be right or wrong about facts. But I would say facts only make up a small part of our discussions.

When it comes to opinions, I have my own opinions (some that I feel more strongly about than others), but I have always found it to be more compatible to good discussion if approached with an open mind when discussing things that aren’t black and white, even if I don’t necessarily agree.

Sometimes I even learn things that way. For example, in this discussion I learned that Pete has called for Matt’s firing in articles (or at least suggested his seat should be among the hottest), which probably affects MLF’s attitude toward him, which is something I didn’t know before and adds some perspective for me on my opinion about it.

I agree with they. See I think you and I might be more similar than you think. It’s probably just more of a half glass empty glass half full. I’ll try or attempt to disagree in a more subtle way. I’m a Scorpio, loyal to a fault but ready to Sting at a moments notice. It’s just how I’m built. I’d take a bullet for someone I dislike I’m not going to stop to ask your political affiliation or hand around for a thank you. Sometimes people perceive that on the face as some type of animosity. I hold zero ill regard toward you whatsoever and I’m bold enough to tell it to your face if I did… just in case that thought ever creeps up, I enjoy your input. We might just be born to disagree on stuff.

 

[Magooch]

Something I've said before is that it often feels like Matt play calls for the team that he *wishes* he had rather than the one he *actually* has.

Similarly I often find myself feeling like Matt has a tendency to fixate on what "should" work in theory - or an approach that is "responsible" or the "right way to play" rather than just to call what's actually working.

Today, we'll see how it pans out...But it's like, we've seen so many times where we're playing aggressive and it's working. Or we have where we might be doing demonstrably better when passing in the early downs rather than running. And so on.

But it's like...Matt seems like he just feels really strongly that you're "supposed" to run on the early downs. You're "supposed" to win games by establishing the running game and controlling the time of possession. Like you're not supposed to be able to hit deep shots without first setting them up through the ground game. And so even when these things ARE working it's as though Matt feels like eventually it's going to come back and bite him in the rear. It's like he thinks "Okay well passing in the early downs is working now but surely the defense will adjust soon" or "We don't want to get too predictable on them so we better change things up"

And I don't know if that's more a matter of "principle" or feeling that he "should" approach games a particular way, or if it's a matter of trying to outsmart the opponent and ending up outsmarting himself or what exactly. But I guess all that to say....I just wish he was okay sometimes with letting good enough be good enough. It's okay to let what's working keep working until it doesn't and THEN adjust, rather than move away from what's working BEFORE it's stopped. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good and all that.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Something I've said before is that it often feels like Matt play calls for the team that he *wishes* he had rather than the one he *actually* has.

Similarly I often find myself feeling like Matt has a tendency to fixate on what "should" work in theory - or an approach that is "responsible" or the "right way to play" rather than just to call what's actually working.

Today, we'll see how it pans out...But it's like, we've seen so many times where we're playing aggressive and it's working. Or we have where we might be doing demonstrably better when passing in the early downs rather than running. And so on.

But it's like...Matt seems like he just feels really strongly that you're "supposed" to run on the early downs. You're "supposed" to win games by establishing the running game and controlling the time of possession. Like you're not supposed to be able to hit deep shots without first setting them up through the ground game. And so even when these things ARE working it's as though Matt feels like eventually it's going to come back and bite him in the rear. It's like he thinks "Okay well passing in the early downs is working now but surely the defense will adjust soon" or "We don't want to get too predictable on them so we better change things up"

And I don't know if that's more a matter of "principle" or feeling that he "should" approach games a particular way, or if it's a matter of trying to outsmart the opponent and ending up outsmarting himself or what exactly. But I guess all that to say....I just wish he was okay sometimes with letting good enough be good enough. It's okay to let what's working keep working until it doesn't and THEN adjust, rather than move away from what's working BEFORE it's stopped. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good and all that.

"Something I've said before is that it often feels like Matt play calls for the team that he *wishes* he had rather than the one he *actually* has."

Interesting. I never looked at MLF like this. He does tend to call long passes more often than other coaches. It worked like a charm today against Chicago.

I'd rather see a game plan that keeps a D off balance. A game plan that prioritized time of possession - long scoring drives with the occasional long pass if the safety breaks the wrong way.

I don't know. There is a lot of talent on the team. Looked like it today in the W over Chicago. Now need to be able to rinse and repeat that.

 

[milani]

"Something I've said before is that it often feels like Matt play calls for the team that he *wishes* he had rather than the one he *actually* has."

Interesting. I never looked at MLF like this. He does tend to call long passes more often than other coaches. It worked like a charm today against Chicago.

I'd rather see a game plan that keeps a D off balance. A game plan that prioritized time of possession - long scoring drives with the occasional long pass if the safety breaks the wrong way.

I don't know. There is a lot of talent on the team. Looked like it today in the W over Chicago. Now need to be able to rinse and repeat that.

As Vince once said before a meaningless season finale against Pittsburgh: " We have to run at least 10 or 15 fly patterns. They can't cover! "

 

[Poppa San]

Interesting. I never looked at MLF like this. He does tend to call long passes more often than other coaches. It worked like a charm today against Chicago.

I sometimes wonder if every play in the book has a fly pattern audible depending on what JL10 sees.

I'd rather see a game plan that keeps a D off balance. A game plan that prioritized time of possession - long scoring drives with the occasional long pass if the safety breaks the wrong way

So you missed the first quarter drives?

 

[Phx Packer Fan]

Couldn’t find a thread for this, so I’m starting one. The team looks so unprepared and undisciplined, and that’s on the coaching staff. I’m not saying he should be fired, but given our recent performance, I suspect we will hear more in this vein soon. So it’s worth having a thread.

 

[Phx Packer Fan]

Flat Lafluer (Flat not Matt for obvious reasons) was NEVER qualified for this job. And it is simple, He, Brian Gutekunst and Ed Policy OBVIOUSLY do not know how to game plan a winning strategy. We have a very talented team run by people who would get shut out at the Pee Wee level. I was a season club seat ticket holder until 2020 and at the first game La Fluer coached, every other season ticket holder asked who the heck is Matt LaFluer, and why is he here. He was handed a dynasty that should have 3 super bowl appearances and all we got was barely making the playoffs, ALWAYS an early exit, AND!!! he ran arguably the second greatest quarterback ever out of town!!! (Those are Aarons Rodgers words). FIRE THEM ALL NOW!!!!!

 

[Heyjoe4]

I sometimes wonder if every play in the book has a fly pattern audible depending on what JL10 sees.

So you missed the first quarter drives?

Poppa, you quote me out of context. In that same comment, I also wrote:

"There is a lot of talent on the team. Looked like it today in the W over Chicago. Now need to be able to rinse and repeat that."

They showed nothing in the first four weeks to suggest they would play that well against Chicago. Hopefully, the team we saw against the Bears is what we'll see going forward. Watching that game, it felt like someone flipped a switch. I still need to see them execute consistently. That said, I picked them to beat Chicago, just not this thoroughly. And I think they'll beat Dallas Sunday night. One game at a time.

 

[OldSchool101]

Poppa, you quote me out of context. In that same comment, I also wrote:

"There is a lot of talent on the team. Looked like it today in the W over Chicago. Now need to be able to rinse and repeat that."

They showed nothing in the first four weeks to suggest they would play that well against Chicago. Hopefully, the team we saw against the Bears is what we'll see going forward. Watching that game, it felt like someone flipped a switch. I still need to see them execute consistently. That said, I picked them to beat Chicago, just not this thoroughly. And I think they'll beat Dallas Sunday night. One game at a time.

That’s precisely what we need to see. Stack a couple bacon to back double digit wins or maybe 4 in a row etc.., even beating 3 or 4 average teams or in an ascending (non elite) fashion would bring not only us confidence, but would bring confidence to our entire organization.

I know Dallas is not on top of their game either, but they are plenty talented enough (not suggesting you said otherwise) to get that spark and put up 30 points etc. We need to start 4-2 that’ll give us a little cushion and likely keep us .500+ through 10 games.

 

[milani]

Poppa, you quote me out of context. In that same comment, I also wrote:

"There is a lot of talent on the team. Looked like it today in the W over Chicago. Now need to be able to rinse and repeat that."

They showed nothing in the first four weeks to suggest they would play that well against Chicago. Hopefully, the team we saw against the Bears is what we'll see going forward. Watching that game, it felt like someone flipped a switch. I still need to see them execute consistently. That said, I picked them to beat Chicago, just not this thoroughly. And I think they'll beat Dallas Sunday night. One game at a time.

Offensively, the Cowboys will have quite an upgrade at QB than Bagent. And they have the receivers and the experience. You should not see all the mistakes the Bears made. The question is will the Cowboys bring there A game or will their spark plugs miss like they did vs. Tampa. We cannot let them drain the clock.

 

[Heyjoe4]

That’s precisely what we need to see. Stack a couple bacon to back double digit wins or maybe 4 in a row etc.., even beating 3 or 4 average teams or in an ascending (non elite) fashion would bring not only us confidence, but would bring confidence to our entire organization.

I know Dallas is not on top of their game either, but they are plenty talented enough (not suggesting you said otherwise) to get that spark and put up 30 points etc. We need to start 4-2 that’ll give us a little cushion and likely keep us .500+ through 10 games.

I think your assessment of Dallas is spot on. They have a susceptible D, to out it mildly. They also have Prescott, Lamb, and Pickens. Could be a shootout Sunday night in GB.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Offensively, the Cowboys will have quite an upgrade at QB than Bagent. And they have the receivers and the experience. You should not see all the mistakes the Bears made. The question is will the Cowboys bring there A game or will their spark plugs miss like they did vs. Tampa. We cannot let them drain the clock.

Yeah the 'Boys have a potent passing attack with Prescott, Lamb, and Pickens. Their D seems terrible. It's a game the Packers should win.

 

[OldSchool101]

I think your assessment of Dallas is spot on. They have a susceptible D, to out it mildly. They also have Prescott, Lamb, and Pickens. Could be a shootout Sunday night in GB.

Yes.
Although if we include TE into a Trio?
I like the GB Trio of Watson, Golden Krafts
5 contests; 1,083 yards, 9 TD’s
Vs

Lamb, Pickens, Ferguson
5 contests 964, 8 TD’s

 

[milani]

Yes.
Although if we include TE into a Trio?
I like the GB Trio of Watson, Golden Krafts
5 contests; 1,083 yards, 9 TD’s
Vs

Lamb, Pickens, Ferguson
5 contests 964, 8 TD’s

And then it could come down to Aubrey vs. Smack. The kid gets his NFL baptism.

 

[OldSchool101]

And then it could come down to Aubrey vs. Smack. The kid gets his NFL baptism.

I agree this is good for him. If he’s going to withstand the rigors of NFL pressure, this would be a good time to bounce back from an awful game.

 

[gopkrs]

I can't help wonder if snapper and holder had something to do with it. I would hope the new and improved STs coach is able to work it out. And that he doesn't forget about stopping long kick off returns.