Decline of Mike McCarthy

[rodell330]

Your optimism is always so refreshing Rodell.

Glad I can help, buddy. I say what I want buddy...I’m not here to be refreshing.

 

[brandon2348]

I used to think Rodell was negative but he has actually been right on with this horror show.

 

[Mondio]

we have different definitions of "right on" LOL

 

[brandon2348]

we have different definitions of "right on" LOL

That's great Mondio. I gotta go to the bathroom and take a "Thompson Turd". Might take awhile. Real backed up.

I'll be back later.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

We give guys like Clay Matthew's, Nick Perry and Mike Daniel's big contracts instead.

There might be a point to be made that it was a mistake to re-sign Perry but the Packers keeping Matthews and Daniels were no-brainers.

 

[brandon2348]

There might be a point to be made that it was a mistake to re-sign Perry but the Packers keeping Matthews and Daniels were no-brainers.

$ could of been spent better. Matthew's was kept way to long and they could of dropped him two years ago if they wanted to and replaced him with someone better.

Daniel's deal was fine but if were talking right now we need to do better then him.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

$ could of been spent better. Matthew's was kept way to long and they could of dropped him two years ago if they wanted to and replaced him with someone better.

Daniel's deal was fine but if were talking right now we need to do better then him.

In hindsight the Packers overpaid for both Matthews and Daniels. But once again at that point it was the right decision to re-sign them.

 

[Sanguine camper]

It can't be overstated that CM3 had his best seasons when Jenkins and BJ Raji were at their best. It was pressure from the middle that allowed CM3 to get to the qb. While CM3 has declined, its a team game and his drop in sacks reflects the lack of a consistent pass rush from the entire front 7. They overpaid for CM3 because they expected too much from the edge rushers and not enough from the interior or blitzes.

 

[brandon2348]

It can't be overstated that CM3 had his best seasons when Jenkins and BJ Raji were at their best. It was pressure from the middle that allowed CM3 to get to the qb. While CM3 has declined, its a team game and his drop in sacks reflects the lack of a consistent pass rush from the entire front 7. They overpaid for CM3 because they expected too much from the edge rushers and not enough from the interior or blitzes.

Clay Matthews was at his best when he was taking PED's. The minute he got investigated his play went down.

 

[brandon2348]

In hindsight the Packers overpaid for both Matthews and Daniels. But once again at that point it was the right decision to re-sign them.

I understand that but what I am saying is the Packers rarely ever get out of bad contracts if there is even just a small amount of dead $. They just keep paying the contract out. IMO that's gotta stop and you have to be willing to eat smaller amounts of dead $ and find better solutions. The Patriots don't stick to guys that are washed and still in contracts. They give them the boot. Why can't we?

 

[PackAttack12]

I understand that but what I am saying is the Packers rarely ever get out of bad contracts if there is even just a small amount of dead $. They just keep paying the contract out. IMO that's gotta stop and you have to be willing to eat smaller amounts of dead $ and find better solutions. The Patriots don't stick to guys that are washed and still in contracts. They give them the boot. Why can't we?

That's what I'm hoping the Packers decide to do with Perry. Just eat it now and move on.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I understand that but what I am saying is the Packers rarely ever get out of bad contracts if there is even just a small amount of dead $. They just keep paying the contract out. IMO that's gotta stop and you have to be willing to eat smaller amounts of dead $ and find better solutions. The Patriots don't stick to guys that are washed and still in contracts. They give them the boot. Why can't we?

I agree the Packers hold on to declining veterans too long even if releasing one of them wouldn't result in a huge amount of dead money.

Nevertheless it was the right move to re-sign both Matthews and Daniels at the point they were set to become free agents.

 

[Half Empty]

OK, OK, (1) nothing wrong with bringing those two guys back, (2) not at those prices.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

That's what I'm hoping the Packers decide to do with Perry. Just eat it now and move on.

NE never would have given him that contract, unless they were planning on trading him.

 

[rodell330]

That's what I'm hoping the Packers decide to do with Perry. Just eat it now and move on.

Mise we’ll. Perry is a waste smh. He will forever have hand issues and all the other ailments he currently can’t heal from. It’s a hit but it’s time for moving on from overpaid guys who give you minimal production. Guys like Cobb, Matthews, Perry, Bulaga and even Tramon Williams all have to go. Again, this team needs to spend all that money even if they have to overpay for some of these top free agents.

 

[brandon2348]

That's what I'm hoping the Packers decide to do with Perry. Just eat it now and move on.

I agree. Its does a few things. It free's up a little $ and allows the Packers to move now on replacing him and giving someone else the reps with little risk as Perry's play was horrible or absent most of the time. It really couldn't get much worse.

It also sends a message to guys that you better play and bring your "A Game."

 

[rmontro]

For those of you who were strongly pro or con hiring Josh McDaniels as our coach:

Did you hear the story about the Patriots sole touchdown drive in the Super Bowl? There were nine minutes left in the game, and Josh McDaniels said nothing is working, so he drew up a new formation and offense on the spot. Which is why the Pats went into a huddle, because they weren't familiar with the offense.

Whatever you think of McDaniels, can you imagine McCarthy coming up with something on the fly like that?

 

[longtimefan]

For those of you who were strongly pro or con hiring Josh McDaniels as our coach:

Did you hear the story about the Patriots sole touchdown drive in the Super Bowl? There were nine minutes left in the game, and Josh McDaniels said nothing is working, so he drew up a new formation and offense on the spot. Which is why the Pats went into a huddle, because they weren't familiar with the offense.

Whatever you think of McDaniels, can you imagine McCarthy coming up with something on the fly like that?

It was a formation they hadn't put on the menu per Gronk.. It was something they had but didn't intend on using.. According to NBC sports it wasn't drawn up in the dirt

 

[Mondio]

We don't have to, neither is with the Packers. and who cares. Sometimes you throw **** at a wall it sticks. According to Romo, the 3 biggest plays in that drive were the same play. And what does it say if you have 2 weeks to prepare and none of what you came up with worked?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

OK, OK, (1) nothing wrong with bringing those two guys back, (2) not at those prices.

At the point the Packers signed Matthews and Daniels to their current contracts the numbers seemed to be reasonable.

Again, this team needs to spend all that money even if they have to overpay for some of these top free agents.

The Packers shouldn't overpay to sign any free agents, otherwise we will discuss about it the same way we do with Matthews and Perry in a year or two.

 

[rmontro]

It was a formation they hadn't put on the menu per Gronk.. It was something they had but didn't intend on using.. According to NBC sports it wasn't drawn up in the dirt

The point still stands though. McDaniels showed the ability to make adjustments on the fly, something that McCarthy was criticized many times for being unwilling or unable to.

I'm not fully convinced McDaniels would have taken the job even if the Packers had offered it though.

 

[longtimefan]

The point still stands though. McDaniels showed the ability to make adjustments on the fly, something that McCarthy was criticized many times for being unwilling or unable to.

I'm not fully convinced McDaniels would have taken the job even if the Packers had offered it though.

Correct . He thought outside the box..

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm not fully convinced McDaniels would have taken the job even if the Packers had offered it though.

McDaniels would have agreed in principle to take the job with the Packers but after the Super Bowl told them that he changed his mind.

 

[rmontro]

McDaniels would have agreed in principle to take the job with the Packers but after the Super Bowl told them that he changed his mind.

Wouldn't surprise me. I wonder if Matt LeFleur would have still been available if that were the case?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Wouldn't surprise me. I wonder if Matt LeFleur would have still been available if that were the case?

A very good point and one I think the Packers thought hard and long about with a few candidates, not just HC candidates. Waiting around for coaches that are still coaching to end their season, can be risky.