ALL recent another head coach options merged-- preMM firing

Status
Not open for further replies.

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,301
Reaction score
1,695
I like McCarthy, and I think he is a good coach. But my biggest problems with him has been
1) Hanging on to Capers too long.
2) Failing to scheme receivers open, and instead relying on them to "win their battles".
3) Waiting too long to change when things are working.

I don't think it's all McCarthy's fault though. TT spent most of our draft capital on the defense because of our continuing problems there, and I really believe this is one reason our offense has fallen off.
Good point. As much as I want to see GB replace MM, the problems aren’t all his (although you put together a pretty good list!). But any time a team struggles when it shouldn’t, the HC holds all the responsibility, just comes with the job. I’m disappointed with MM’s inability to get his team fired up, and his inability to make half-time adjustments. This explains, somewhat, why the first half has generally seen good production, falsely assuming the opponent won’t adjust. More than anything I’m surprised. I thought MM had the ability to adjust (to new rules, in-game, etc.).

As for the “we’ve only won one SB with Rodgers” - well the Saints have only won one with Brees (although it might be two this season). And P. Manning really only won one SB, I don’t count him as part of the Denver SB win. The impossible standard set by BB/TB in NE is how coaches with great QBs are measured, and again, that’s an impossible standard. All that said, we should get another Lombardi Trophy before ARod calls it a day, ideally two. Any good news here? The Packers aren’t very far away from having a great team. It’s also frustrating as a fan. “Next season” is always a long way off........
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,969
Reaction score
1,244
Well put. Unlike the Ron Wolf tree, NE hasn’t spawned any real coaching talent, so looking there is looking for fool’s gold. It’s a bit of a mystery to me, but the record is what it is, terrible. Not that I have better suggestions, but there have to be others out there. I’d be very surprised if Murphy and Gluten don’t already have a list of candidates.

They better have a list of candidates. The only reason they wouldn't is if they have already decided to keep McCarthy and that would be a mistake not because he should be gone but McCarthy himself might decide to say the heck with it and choose to move on. I don't think he would but I wouldn't blame him if he did. If I were in his place with all the crap being thrown at me, granted much of it deservedly so, I might consider the HC job in Cleveland to be more enticing than remaining in Green Bay.

Just because NE hasn't spawned any real coaching talent doesn't mean its not worth taking a look at what they have. It does beg the question of why they haven't though. In a small way I liken it to the question of why so many Badger RBs have failed to make it in the NFL when they had great college careers (that is changing a bit now) is it because Wisconsin's line was always so much better than the defenses they faced? With regards to NE and the coaching is it all really Bill Belichick?
 
Last edited:

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
4,611
Reaction score
1,285
And P. Manning really only won one SB, I don’t count him as part of the Denver SB win. The impossible standard set by BB/TB in NE is how coaches with great QBs are measured, and again, that’s an impossible standard. All that said, we should get another Lombardi Trophy before ARod calls it a day, ideally two.
Good point on McCarthy's half time adjustments (or lack thereof), that's a major issue too.

You can count Peyton's second Super Bowl or not, but he still has two rings.
People say Rodgers should win another Super Bowl, but his big salary is an obstacle. The trend these days is toward young, talented quarterbacks who aren't commanding top dollar yet. Our biggest strength may also be our biggest weakness.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,073
Reaction score
7,891
Location
Madison, WI
In a small way I liken it to the question of why so many Badger RBs have failed to make it in the NFL when they had great college careers (that is changing a bit now) is it because Wisconsin's line was always so much better than the defenses they faced?

I hear that a lot and not blaming you for the one who supports it and glad to see you say "that is changing a bit now". While the broad statement has some merit, I would say some of it is also explainable. Ron Dayne had an "ok" NFL career (983 carries 3722 yards 28 TD's and 3.8 average over 7 years), but not the one everyone expected out of him as a Heisman winner. I don't think NY was a great fit for him either. When he went to Denver, he averaged 5.1/carry but injuries and his weight caught up to him. Montee Ball is another one people like to use, well Montees issues were mainly off the field (drinking and arrests) and taking football seriously. Melvin Gordon, James White and Corey Clement, have had pretty good NFL careers. I expect Anthony Davis to be just as good, if not better than Gordon, as long as he can work on holding onto the ball :)

So sure, the Badgers great OL's have possibly helped to make Badger RB's look better than they might be, but that wouldn't make my shy away from one. I'm pretty certain you could look at some of the top 25 College programs and find groups of players that while they looked good in college, it didn't transfer well to the NFL level. OSU QB's come to mind. I often take the same viewpoint with Alabama, they have had a lot of "stars" flop in the NFL, but that wouldn't make me shy away from at least thinking about Bama Stars, because they have had a lot of successful NFL players too.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,073
Reaction score
7,891
Location
Madison, WI
Good point on McCarthy's half time adjustments (or lack thereof), that's a major issue too.

You can count Peyton's second Super Bowl or not, but he still has two rings.
People say Rodgers should win another Super Bowl, but his big salary is an obstacle. The trend these days is toward young, talented quarterbacks who aren't commanding top dollar yet. Our biggest strength may also be our biggest weakness.
Like they are doing in New England and New Orleans ;) But yes, I understand what you are saying, if you get lucky and have a decent QB (Mahomes, Goff, Wendt), on a rookie salary, it frees a lot of money up to sign some better players at other positions. All that said, it shouldn't be used as an excuse for preventing the Packers from fielding a very solid team around the highest paid player in the NFL.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
6,301
Reaction score
1,695
Good point on McCarthy's half time adjustments (or lack thereof), that's a major issue too.

You can count Peyton's second Super Bowl or not, but he still has two rings.
People say Rodgers should win another Super Bowl, but his big salary is an obstacle. The trend these days is toward young, talented quarterbacks who aren't commanding top dollar yet. Our biggest strength may also be our biggest weakness.
Yeah, a ring is a ring.

And there has been an unusual rise in very talented QBs combing out of college and making a BIG impact within a year or two - Mahomes, Wentz, to a lesser extent Trubisky. Mayfield looks good. That gives those teams the luxury of spending elsewhere (like on K. Mack). Next year, the Packers should clear a lot of cap - CMIII, Cobb, maybe Perry - guys getting paid a lot and not producing. Hopefully Gluten can find some use for that extra cap. I can’t imagine this team w/o Rodgers, but ya gotta pay the man.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,073
Reaction score
7,891
Location
Madison, WI
Not sure if he has the skill set to be a successful OC, but I wonder if there has been any thought to not only bring in a new HC but to bring back Alex Van Pelt as the OC. Van Pelt and Rodgers had an excellent relationship and it might be a way to help fix both AR and the offense. Van Pelt was the Bill's OC in 2009.
 

PackerDNA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 8, 2014
Messages
6,428
Reaction score
1,499
No to Van Pelt or anyone else who has been here before. This organization needs to stop with the "we're putting the old band back together" crap.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,073
Reaction score
7,891
Location
Madison, WI
No to Van Pelt or anyone else who has been here before. This organization needs to stop with the "we're putting the old band back together" crap.

Like I said, I don't know if Van Pelt has the "chops" to be a solid OC, but I think its pretty apparent that 2 things have to change before the Packers get better.
  1. Aaron Rodgers needs to fix his sh*t
  2. Coaching has to be brought in that helps Aaron Rodgers fix his sh*t
If what is being said about the whole MM and AR dynamics is true, this is kind of starting to feel a bit like the Brett Favre situation all over again. Favre was shipped out and eventually his new environment in Minnesota was beneficial to him and the Vikings. That option isn't currently available with Rodgers so IMO Rodgers needs a new environment of coaches around him, as well as he needs to look at himself in a mirror and realize change on his part is needed as well.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,795
Like I said, I don't know if Van Pelt has the "chops" to be a solid OC, but I think its pretty apparent that 2 things have to change before the Packers get better.
  1. Aaron Rodgers needs to fix his sh*t
  2. Coaching has to be brought in that helps Aaron Rodgers fix his sh*t
If what is being said about the whole MM and AR dynamics is true, this is kind of starting to feel a bit like the Brett Favre situation all over again. Favre was shipped out and eventually his new environment in Minnesota was beneficial to him and the Vikings. That option isn't currently available with Rodgers so IMO Rodgers needs a new environment of coaches around him, as well as he needs to look at himself in a mirror and realize change on his part is needed as well.
The problem I have with this scenario is this, the initial sheen will wear off, if it manifests itself to begin with. A change in coach fixing things supposes a couple things i'm not sure are true. #1 being that this offense is a style that fits our QB, one he prefers, one he likes, one that fits his strengths. so just changing it to something else doesn't mean it will be successful. Right now parts of it are missing and I think it has as much to do with a previously injured QB and having 1 pass catcher that knows the offense. Considering it took 2-3 years for every other receiver to come in here and be effective it will come in time. Now some might argue that's on the coach, but I think it has as much to do with the QB as anything and where he is going to go with the ball. Like I said before, he needs to start running the offense as it's called. Period. Throw to the young guys and let them make the plays, or fail and see what their mistakes cost this team and get better. Quit talking about it needing to be on the same page and get it done.

But the Favre situation was different, to me at least. Sherman wasn't a good coach to me. Good guy, decent enough, but overall not that good. I think MM is a good coach. The fact that Rodgers might not respect him worries me in that this is a coach that took Favre and his 30 INT's back to MVP type seasons and then took a QB that needed work and turned him into the Aaron Rodgers we know. That should carry some weight. If it doesn't, what coach will? A new message will wear off the second it doesn't work and we're right back where we started except maybe with a lesser coach.

I'm not saying this team is doomed, but if we truly have a QB that thinks he's smarter than the coaches, we have big, big problems considering he's leaving plays out there every single game that every starting QB in the league can make and thinking it's the play calls. this notion we're expecting him to be superman does not hold true this year.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
The problem I have with this scenario is this, the initial sheen will wear off, if it manifests itself to begin with. A change in coach fixing things supposes a couple things i'm not sure are true. #1 being that this offense is a style that fits our QB, one he prefers, one he likes, one that fits his strengths. so just changing it to something else doesn't mean it will be successful. Right now parts of it are missing and I think it has as much to do with a previously injured QB and having 1 pass catcher that knows the offense. Considering it took 2-3 years for every other receiver to come in here and be effective it will come in time. Now some might argue that's on the coach, but I think it has as much to do with the QB as anything and where he is going to go with the ball. Like I said before, he needs to start running the offense as it's called. Period. Throw to the young guys and let them make the plays, or fail and see what their mistakes cost this team and get better. Quit talking about it needing to be on the same page and get it done.

But the Favre situation was different, to me at least. Sherman wasn't a good coach to me. Good guy, decent enough, but overall not that good. I think MM is a good coach. The fact that Rodgers might not respect him worries me in that this is a coach that took Favre and his 30 INT's back to MVP type seasons and then took a QB that needed work and turned him into the Aaron Rodgers we know. That should carry some weight. If it doesn't, what coach will? A new message will wear off the second it doesn't work and we're right back where we started except maybe with a lesser coach.

I'm not saying this team is doomed, but if we truly have a QB that thinks he's smarter than the coaches, we have big, big problems considering he's leaving plays out there every single game that every starting QB in the league can make and thinking it's the play calls. this notion we're expecting him to be superman does not hold true this year.

I mostly agree with your assessment but it's pretty obvious McCarthy isn't able to have Rodgers buy into his system anymore. While that might be the quarterback's fault there's no way the team will move on from #12.

Therefore the only way to get the offense back on track is hiring a new head coach.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,073
Reaction score
7,891
Location
Madison, WI
I generally like Pete Dougherty's assessments of what is going on in Green Bay and I think he puts it pretty well with this.

https://www.packersnews.com/story/s...dgers-marriage-has-run-its-course/2144453002/

I don't think the Packers are going to be looking for a HC or OC that comes in and completely wants to change what Rodgers and the offense has been successful at, that is a recipe for disaster with a 35 year old QB like AR. What they should look for is a guy that can work with what Rodgers has and one that Rodgers himself says "Hey, I'm on board with his ideas and coaching style". That....will be the hardest part, but a necessary one, selling Rodgers on it. Otherwise, if you leave things "as is", do you really expect much to change?
 
Last edited:

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,795
I generally like Pete Dougherty's assessments of what is going on in Green Bay and I think he puts it pretty well with this.

https://www.packersnews.com/story/s...dgers-marriage-has-run-its-course/2144453002/

I don't think the Packers are going to be looking for a HC or OC that comes in and completely wants to change what Rodgers and the offense has been successful at, that is a recipe for disaster with a 35 year old QB like AR. What they should look for is a guy that can work with what Rodgers has and one that Rodgers himself says "Hey, I'm on board with his ideas and coaching style". That....will be the hardest part, but a necessary one, selling Rodgers on it. Otherwise, if you leave things "as is", do you really expect much to change?
Yes I would. Rodgers would be a year removed from what i'm almost positive was at the very least and MCL tear. 2 talented rookies will be a season more experienced and hopefully at least 1 guard position upgraded. Of course it would take an investment in the coach the same as the QB so one didn't think he was irreplaceable and the other could be sent on his way. They're both good enough and professional enough to make it work. That's no to say another coach couldn't make it work too, he could. But the issues will be the same. Plays need to be run and executed, bought into or not, successful or not, coaches coach, players play and execute and if the plays are being left on the field, that's the first problem that needs to be corrected and that has nothing to do with play calls.

and if the problem is #12 doesn't buy it, then our problems are big. Every week i read about route concepts and stale play calling and then I see open receivers that he just will not throw to. If the QB has problems he needs to get over them. If you have someone that only performs when he likes what is being called and feels irreplaceable, because for at least 3-4 years that is true, we're in trouble.
 

azrsx05

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
610
Reaction score
77
I respect mccarthy as a person and he's always a class act. He will never air out dirty laundry and I think in general he's a good offensive minded coach.

I think everyone has just reached the point where it's best for everyone to start fresh. Giving Rodgers too much power has diminished the respect he gets from the rest of the players as Rodgers questions everything mccarthy calls.

Although he is part of the problem, I think the bigger problem was TTs crappy drafts and stubbornness to admit he missed and not get a FA to fill the hole. Also many of our high paid players are not producing
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,466
Reaction score
598
I think the easy (subjective) evaluation of any coach is if, despite any problems (talent level, injuries, whatever), he's gotten more out of the players than might be expected.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,073
Reaction score
7,891
Location
Madison, WI
I think the easy (subjective) evaluation of any coach is if, despite any problems (talent level, injuries, whatever), he's gotten more out of the players than might be expected.
Agree and when you apply that to many of the Packer coaches, I'm having a hard time, at least right now, saying many of them have gotten more out of the players than might be expected. Perhaps Pettine, OL coach Campen and maybe DL coach Jerry Montgomery.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
4,611
Reaction score
1,285
If what is being said about the whole MM and AR dynamics is true, this is kind of starting to feel a bit like the Brett Favre situation all over again.
If it is becoming Favre Part Two, we're likely just at the very beginning of it. Cowherd has also compared Rodgers to Favre (odd, since they are so different, and yet there are comparisons). I also noted that the rise of the Rams was what foreshadowed troubled times when Favre was playing, and here the Rams are strong again.

A change in coach fixing things supposes a couple things i'm not sure are true. #1 being that this offense is a style that fits our QB, one he prefers, one he likes, one that fits his strengths. so just changing it to something else doesn't mean it will be successful.
The offense has been stagnant for several years now. I mean it's played well in streaks, and here and there, but it's been inconsistent. People have been wondering what's wrong with the offense since at least 2015. It needs something, even if it's just a good tweaking.

One note on changing the offense: Rodgers has supposedly always been a quick study, it's one of his strengths. Age can make it harder to learn new things though. Would Rodgers still be quick at learning a new system?
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,073
Reaction score
7,891
Location
Madison, WI
One note on changing the offense: Rodgers has supposedly always been a quick study, it's one of his strengths. Age can make it harder to learn new things though. Would Rodgers still be quick at learning a new system?

Agree with your first part, so I didn't include it. I don't think its a matter of running a whole new offense, but more of a matter of getting AR on board with the guy on the sidelines running it. Basically, change is needed or these issues probably won't just disappear. Sure, the Packers offense could hit on all cylinders tomorrow and beyond, but its pretty obvious (to me) that in order to sustain it, something has to give and I don't see MM or AR completely changing their personalities and styles of coaching/playing enough to allow for them to continue together.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,969
Reaction score
1,244
I hear that a lot and not blaming you for the one who supports it and glad to see you say "that is changing a bit now". While the broad statement has some merit, I would say some of it is also explainable. Ron Dayne had an "ok" NFL career (983 carries 3722 yards 28 TD's and 3.8 average over 7 years), but not the one everyone expected out of him as a Heisman winner. I don't think NY was a great fit for him either. When he went to Denver, he averaged 5.1/carry but injuries and his weight caught up to him. Montee Ball is another one people like to use, well Montees issues were mainly off the field (drinking and arrests) and taking football seriously. Melvin Gordon, James White and Corey Clement, have had pretty good NFL careers. I expect Anthony Davis to be just as good, if not better than Gordon, as long as he can work on holding onto the ball :)

So sure, the Badgers great OL's have possibly helped to make Badger RB's look better than they might be, but that wouldn't make my shy away from one. I'm pretty certain you could look at some of the top 25 College programs and find groups of players that while they looked good in college, it didn't transfer well to the NFL level. OSU QB's come to mind. I often take the same viewpoint with Alabama, they have had a lot of "stars" flop in the NFL, but that wouldn't make me shy away from at least thinking about Bama Stars, because they have had a lot of successful NFL players too.


There was Brent Moss in there as well (who I just found out was sentenced to 1 year in prison last year on drug charges) You are right in all you say and I probably could have used Alabama or OSU or Tedford's QBs. I just used Badger RBs because I figured everyone was well familiar with them.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,969
Reaction score
1,244
I generally like Pete Dougherty's assessments of what is going on in Green Bay and I think he puts it pretty well with this.

https://www.packersnews.com/story/s...dgers-marriage-has-run-its-course/2144453002/

I don't think the Packers are going to be looking for a HC or OC that comes in and completely wants to change what Rodgers and the offense has been successful at, that is a recipe for disaster with a 35 year old QB like AR. What they should look for is a guy that can work with what Rodgers has and one that Rodgers himself says "Hey, I'm on board with his ideas and coaching style". That....will be the hardest part, but a necessary one, selling Rodgers on it. Otherwise, if you leave things "as is", do you really expect much to change?

Rodgers has been very successful with this offense in the past so I don't know that we need to change it much. We just need to get the old AR back and at this point I think what you said about him being on board is the major factor. If it takes making MM into a scapegoat then so be it. Like WIMM say AR isn't going anywhere for a while so we might as well grab a snickers and a new coach. Hopefully it is someone Rodgers respects :rolleyes: and can get on board with.
 

CS1

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 1, 2018
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I just hope it is someone who knows defense. This is a lot like the Manning-Dungy situation.
 

pacmaniac

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
2,085
Reaction score
571
Mark Murphy said "If we can finish the season strong, even if we don’t make the playoffs (and crazier things have happened), it will give the team confidence that can carry over to next year." I hope he doesn't keep MM if the team finishes strong and doesn't make the playoffs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Latest posts

Top