Fire Matt LaFleur

How many wins does MLF need to keep his job?

  • 2

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 3

    Votes: 2 6.3%
  • 4

    Votes: 1 3.1%
  • 5

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 6

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 7

    Votes: 3 9.4%
  • 8+

    Votes: 6 18.8%
  • He shouldn’t be fired this year no matter what

    Votes: 20 62.5%

  • Total voters
    32

Magooch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 15, 2021
Messages
2,152
Reaction score
2,191
It's tough to say. There is probably some truth to both aspects. Matt HAS been let down by his defense and special teams before, that's for sure. Of course this is not to say Matt himself is blameless either - it's not like "his" side of things has always been totally perfect.

BUT, even if it IS primarily just the issue of his coordinators letting him down....how long does that get to go on for? Why bother having a head coach at all if we can continually pass the buck on to his coordinators? There has to be a "buck stops here" type of moment at some point...

I'm kind of sympathetic to it because firing guys just plain sucks all around. It's not fun for anyone but as they say, heavy is the head who wears the crown. When you accept that position (head coach), you have to take on the fun and not-so-fun responsibilities. At the end of the day if we can't hold the head coach responsible for the things that occur in his charge we may as well just demote Matt to OC and just have a whole crew of coordinators running the team, ya know?
 

chemist

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 12, 2023
Messages
361
Reaction score
333
It's tough to say. There is probably some truth to both aspects. Matt HAS been let down by his defense and special teams before, that's for sure. Of course this is not to say Matt himself is blameless either - it's not like "his" side of things has always been totally perfect.

BUT, even if it IS primarily just the issue of his coordinators letting him down....how long does that get to go on for? Why bother having a head coach at all if we can continually pass the buck on to his coordinators? There has to be a "buck stops here" type of moment at some point...

I'm kind of sympathetic to it because firing guys just plain sucks all around. It's not fun for anyone but as they say, heavy is the head who wears the crown. When you accept that position (head coach), you have to take on the fun and not-so-fun responsibilities. At the end of the day if we can't hold the head coach responsible for the things that occur in his charge we may as well just demote Matt to OC and just have a whole crew of coordinators running the team, ya know?
A very sensible post. Fortunately that decision is not up to us. We can talk about it, give our opinions but in the end its out of our hands .
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
21,071
Reaction score
10,837
While I’ve been somewhat vocal about some gameclock and what I call field position mishaps, I also know that fundamentally MLF is a good Coach. He’s also a very good play caller. HOWEVER that does not imply he’s anything special in clock management or challenges or even deciphering real time in game mechanics. I think he’s actually shown some vulnerability on several recent occasions.

My guess is that Aaron Rodgers masked these inadequacies. Aaron could be his own OC, he’s just a special breed of mastering the art of modifying play calling and clock manipulation. They were match made in heaven because they masked each others weakness. It was mostly their Teams and Defense that was a roadblock to a Super Bowl. Had Rodgers played with our Defense from 2024-2025 regularly? I believe he’d have 1 SB and another SB visit at minimum.

Rodgers is long gone. Jordan is a good QB, but he also needs more supervision than Rodgers did when it comes to the proper usage of the clock and mitigating risk and that sort of thing. I wish someone else would handle decisions on team development because I don’t think it’s a strong suit. We are not getting the most from players and it wasn’t until Hafley enters that our Defense Roster was even being Coached properly.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
21,071
Reaction score
10,837
As far as where we go. I still believe that Baltimore was a relative anomoly. I’m not saying we deserved win or dint need to improve so don’t spin this to relieve frustration! What I am saying is I’m about 90% sure we either have Flu B or Covid (or both) or something similar running the ranks. I noticed otherwise healthy players be deactivated last second. Once Riley went down, we literally had 3 healthy DT trying to defend 51 runs. You needed 5 minimum DT for that style game. I’m not talking about Luka’s he’s a hybrid that can pseudo as a 3T. He’s not going to be effective playing Nose or 1T and heck, I’m but even sure he’s 100%? A couple weeks ago he couldn’t play 2 snaps and he’s missed like 10 games? Not good!

We had Wooden who on a good day is an average NT but let’s face it he’s kinda out of ideal position also. Then we had Karl Brooks who’s really used more in a Pass D role (his snaps even display this). He’s not terrible, but pure Run Stop? That is NOT his specialty. Then behind them we’ve got Quinton Bohanna who at best an adequate interior Defender. At 338lb he should be seeing maybe 20-25 snaps TOPS. He doesn’t have the capacity to defend 51 rushes. He’s a rotational level interior guy that might be average IF his snap count is under <25 in a game.

2 of our 4 original DT options this last week were not even signed until December. I kept asking in the game thread “why are we going Light packaged to start?” As I saw Baltimore go Jumbo, I couldn’t understand why we had nobody over C and 2 man gaps regularly. NOW I know why! Yet imo we should’ve activate at minimum 1 more LB and possibly 2 and held an OL or Safety option out. Even if our Pass protection was lacking idk. Make them beat us throwing! We were decimated at DT yet didn’t adjust by activating another LB. Got me thinking maybe they’re all sick too!

Anyway. It’s 11+ days until we play a game that matters. This is crucial. Had we not had a week off we’d be in big big trouble. This gives us a chance to really rest up. We should have Whyle back at TE, I like him. Also we have Jon Ford (the DT not DB!). Brinson or Stackhouse should he back rested by Chicago. That’s 2-3 player options to add at iDT who are minimum adequate in RUN support. After that last game you can bank on Chicago running full throttle and we’d better have plenty of rotation and start with an extra DT play #1. I’d save Bohanna as a reserve mainly for short yardage or to counter that Jumbo 6OL we will see and more in Q2,Q4
 
Last edited:

chemist

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 12, 2023
Messages
361
Reaction score
333
While I’ve been somewhat vocal about some gameclock and what I call field position mishaps, I also know that fundamentally MLF is a good Coach. He’s also a very good play caller. HOWEVER that does not imply he’s anything special in clock management or challenges or even deciphering real time in game mechanics. I think he’s actually shown some vulnerability on several recent occasions.

My guess is that Aaron Rodgers masked these inadequacies. Aaron could be his own OC, he’s just a special breed of mastering the art of modifying play calling and clock manipulation. They were match made in heaven because they masked each others weakness. It was mostly their Teams and Defense that was a roadblock to a Super Bowl. Had Rodgers played with our Defense from 2024-2025 regularly? I believe he’d have 1 SB and another SB visit at minimum.

Rodgers is long gone. Jordan is a good QB, but he also needs more supervision than Rodgers did when it comes to the proper usage of the clock and mitigating risk and that sort of thing. I wish someone else would handle decisions on team development because I don’t think it’s a strong suit. We are not getting the most from players and it wasn’t until Hafley enters that our Defense Roster was even being Coached properly.
Some good insight there on rodgers masking weaknesses. He did kind of takeover later in his career.
 

Magooch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 15, 2021
Messages
2,152
Reaction score
2,191
While I’ve been somewhat vocal about some gameclock and what I call field position mishaps, I also know that fundamentally MLF is a good Coach. He’s also a very good play caller. HOWEVER that does not imply he’s anything special in clock management or challenges or even deciphering real time in game mechanics. I think he’s actually shown some vulnerability on several recent occasions.

My guess is that Aaron Rodgers masked these inadequacies. Aaron could be his own OC, he’s just a special breed of mastering the art of modifying play calling and clock manipulation. They were match made in heaven because they masked each others weakness. It was mostly their Teams and Defense that was a roadblock to a Super Bowl. Had Rodgers played with our Defense from 2024-2025 regularly? I believe he’d have 1 SB and another SB visit at minimum.

Rodgers is long gone. Jordan is a good QB, but he also needs more supervision than Rodgers did when it comes to the proper usage of the clock and mitigating risk and that sort of thing. I wish someone else would handle decisions on team development because I don’t think it’s a strong suit. We are not getting the most from players and it wasn’t until Hafley enters that our Defense Roster was even being Coached properly.
I'm inclined to largely agree with that....

I guess ultimately one of the biggest issues I see with Matt... it's basically that the "end product" doesn't always seem to add up to the sum of the parts, if that makes sense. Matt has a lot of the qualities that you would want in a coach. He has a lot of great coaching traits. But it doesn't always seem to coalesce together to form a great head coach all-around, basically.

It often kinda ends up feeling like one of those "triple constraint" type problems (you often see it proposed as something like "Good, cheap, fast - you can pick two"). It's like Matt has a number of different things he does well...but you're never gonna get all of them done well at the same time.

In general, I think he is a good guy. He seems to have a pretty good team culture in place, and his players like/respect him...but then the trade-off is that his team also often seems undisciplined and unaccountable. And sometimes it is easier to like someone who never holds you accountable for your actions, ya know?

Theoretically/schematically/philosophically his offense is as good as any in the league. And IMO he is as strong as anyone at "scripting" his offense. If we get in favorable situations where the script works, it's unstoppable. But...in practice... he seems to get incredibly bogged-down by the actual in-game management of that offense. And when the initial script doesn't work he is often far too slow to adjust and/or just seems to make all the wrong adjustments.

Long story short, I probably said it 20 pages ago, but ultimately I feel like Matt is a guy is just more suited to being an OC than HC. As above I think he has a lot of good qualities, but is lacking some qualities that hold him back from being really elite. I think he has a strong enough system/philosophy/approach in place that he will always have a competitive team and will always be a good, average, flirting with great head coach (and there have definitely been times where I would say he HAS been great). But I also think he has the mind to be an ELITE, Hall of Fame type of coordinator if he stuck at OC instead of HC.

I dunno, I've kinda said it before (in a few different ways) but I think he's just kind of lacking that killer instinct.
He doesn't want to have to make hard choices.
He doesn't seem to approach much of anything with urgency.
He preaches accountability and discipline, but rarely seems to follow through on it.
In big games, it feels like he is getting out-coached more often than he is the one doing the out-coaching.
He doesn't know how to field a team that plays tough or physical (I remember a while back his own best buddy Robert Salah when he was with the Jets described their approach for facing us: "just keep giving them body blow after body blow, keep hitting them in the mouth... we felt like if we kept taking them down to deep water, they'll find out they can't swim" and that's pretty much always been the case)

So, I don't know. At bare minimum he's going to have to figure out how to make the tough decision to stop missing on his coordinator hires AND to accept when it's time to move on and act decisively. Until he figures that out I don't think we are going to be able to reasonably expect much more out of his time here with GB. Ultimately a great leader is going to be defined by the people they surround themselves with and if you continue to surround yourself with guys who are underqualified, underperforming, etc then you're never going to see your full potential.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
21,071
Reaction score
10,837
I'm inclined to largely agree with that....

I guess ultimately one of the biggest issues I see with Matt... it's basically that the "end product" doesn't always seem to add up to the sum of the parts, if that makes sense. Matt has a lot of the qualities that you would want in a coach. He has a lot of great coaching traits. But it doesn't always seem to coalesce together to form a great head coach all-around, basically.

It often kinda ends up feeling like one of those "triple constraint" type problems (you often see it proposed as something like "Good, cheap, fast - you can pick two"). It's like Matt has a number of different things he does well...but you're never gonna get all of them done well at the same time.

In general, I think he is a good guy. He seems to have a pretty good team culture in place, and his players like/respect him...but then the trade-off is that his team also often seems undisciplined and unaccountable. And sometimes it is easier to like someone who never holds you accountable for your actions, ya know?

Theoretically/schematically/philosophically his offense is as good as any in the league. And IMO he is as strong as anyone at "scripting" his offense. If we get in favorable situations where the script works, it's unstoppable. But...in practice... he seems to get incredibly bogged-down by the actual in-game management of that offense. And when the initial script doesn't work he is often far too slow to adjust and/or just seems to make all the wrong adjustments.

Long story short, I probably said it 20 pages ago, but ultimately I feel like Matt is a guy is just more suited to being an OC than HC. As above I think he has a lot of good qualities, but is lacking some qualities that hold him back from being really elite. I think he has a strong enough system/philosophy/approach in place that he will always have a competitive team and will always be a good, average, flirting with great head coach (and there have definitely been times where I would say he HAS been great). But I also think he has the mind to be an ELITE, Hall of Fame type of coordinator if he stuck at OC instead of HC.

I dunno, I've kinda said it before (in a few different ways) but I think he's just kind of lacking that killer instinct.
He doesn't want to have to make hard choices.
He doesn't seem to approach much of anything with urgency.
He preaches accountability and discipline, but rarely seems to follow through on it.
In big games, it feels like he is getting out-coached more often than he is the one doing the out-coaching.
He doesn't know how to field a team that plays tough or physical (I remember a while back his own best buddy Robert Salah when he was with the Jets described their approach for facing us: "just keep giving them body blow after body blow, keep hitting them in the mouth... we felt like if we kept taking them down to deep water, they'll find out they can't swim" and that's pretty much always been the case)

So, I don't know. At bare minimum he's going to have to figure out how to make the tough decision to stop missing on his coordinator hires AND to accept when it's time to move on and act decisively. Until he figures that out I don't think we are going to be able to reasonably expect much more out of his time here with GB. Ultimately a great leader is going to be defined by the people they surround themselves with and if you continue to surround yourself with guys who are underqualified, underperforming, etc then you're never going to see your full potential.
I will say this. As much as we melted down last week. We seem to matchup to Chicago better. We’ve seen enough to know that Chicago isn’t a fluke. They just went toe to toe with SF49ers and we’re looking like another upset. Similar to to our first Chicago game etc

Yet when we played them without Micah? GB had every opportunity to log a Win. Chicago had no business pulling off that OT Win, but when you routinely fumble or turn the ball over? Chicago is plenty good enough to make a team pay dearly. I still believe with relative health our Roster would Win 55 of 100 times.
 

chemist

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 12, 2023
Messages
361
Reaction score
333
I'm inclined to largely agree with that....

I guess ultimately one of the biggest issues I see with Matt... it's basically that the "end product" doesn't always seem to add up to the sum of the parts, if that makes sense. Matt has a lot of the qualities that you would want in a coach. He has a lot of great coaching traits. But it doesn't always seem to coalesce together to form a great head coach all-around,
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
8,445
Reaction score
4,098
It's not that one play though. He has completely bought into the Dan Campbell attitude that punting is stupid. Our number of punts has decreased from 59 2 years ago to 56 last year, to only 41 this year, and it's sure as hell not because we're putting up more points. We've given our opponents a LOT of short fields this year because of his refusal to punt between the 45s. We have a guy who can consistently put the other team inside the 10 yard line from that range and he refuses to do it. But that play from our own 35 was the last straw of many for me. You can't go far with a coach who has tossed aside any regard for field position. So what if Henry was running all over the place? At least if he has to start from his 10 yard line he has a lot further to go. Further to go = more attempts and more attempts = more chances for a turnover.
Whelan must feel ignored.
 

milani

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
8,445
Reaction score
4,098
While I’ve been somewhat vocal about some gameclock and what I call field position mishaps, I also know that fundamentally MLF is a good Coach. He’s also a very good play caller. HOWEVER that does not imply he’s anything special in clock management or challenges or even deciphering real time in game mechanics. I think he’s actually shown some vulnerability on several recent occasions.

My guess is that Aaron Rodgers masked these inadequacies. Aaron could be his own OC, he’s just a special breed of mastering the art of modifying play calling and clock manipulation. They were match made in heaven because they masked each others weakness. It was mostly their Teams and Defense that was a roadblock to a Super Bowl. Had Rodgers played with our Defense from 2024-2025 regularly? I believe he’d have 1 SB and another SB visit at minimum.

Rodgers is long gone. Jordan is a good QB, but he also needs more supervision than Rodgers did when it comes to the proper usage of the clock and mitigating risk and that sort of thing. I wish someone else would handle decisions on team development because I don’t think it’s a strong suit. We are not getting the most from players and it wasn’t until Hafley enters that our Defense Roster was even being Coached properly.
E.G. In the Lion game I would have ran the ball in that last drive to run the clock down, punt, and make Goff go 90 yards with a minute and no timeouts left. Instead he went for the jugular and made it.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
6,401
Reaction score
2,752
Some good insight there on rodgers masking weaknesses. He did kind of takeover later in his career.
Rodgers was an incredible quarterback in his prime. He had some issues winning the big one too though, and he struggled against the cover two.
 

mradtke66

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
2,113
Reaction score
854
Location
Madison, WI
Rodgers was an incredible quarterback in his prime. He had some issues winning the big one too though, and he struggled against the cover two.

He struggled because we didn’t have a counter.

It is hard to throw against cover-2. You either run to force them out of cover-2 and/or have a TE to stress the seam. They years of struggle correlates with us lacking both of them.

Finley was done with neck and our running game was up and down for most of his tenure. If the defense can reliably contain the run w/o bringing a safety down, the passing game will suffer.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
6,401
Reaction score
2,752
He struggled because we didn’t have a counter.

It is hard to throw against cover-2. You either run to force them out of cover-2 and/or have a TE to stress the seam. They years of struggle correlates with us lacking both of them.

Finley was done with neck and our running game was up and down for most of his tenure. If the defense can reliably contain the run w/o bringing a safety down, the passing game will suffer.
Seems like someone failed in a big way stocking our personnel.
 

BrokenArrow

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
Messages
3,273
Reaction score
1,710
Whelan must feel ignored.
I mean, he's had easy money. He gets to watch the game and get paid for nothing the past two weeks and has only had to take the field once in the last 3 games. He also never punted against the Panthers. These are all games we lost, BTW. Coincidence? Field position matters, and it's pretty evident MLF has forgotten that. I think he's decided to be more aggressive, but he thinks that means making stupid decisions on 4th down.
Aggression x stupidity = recklessness
 
Last edited:

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
10,824
Reaction score
4,510
I'm not sure that LaFleur is the main culprit here, but I'll leave it at that.

What is interesting is that IF Policy lets Matt LaFleur go, the Packers would surely be the most coveted HC job in the NFL. It's a turnkey Super Bowl team. I'm not sure if there is another Ben Johnson out there, but who knows!
Hey EG I'm on board with most of your comments so this is an exception. I don't think the Packers, even a heathy team, is a "turnkey SB team".

The entire CB group is useless or close to it. The DL needs shoring up (in addition to the return of Wyatt next season). And the OL is finally looking pretty good. I expect Morgan will be moved to LT next season and he'll play well at his bestn position. The needs of the team are more than a little. And add in DE, assuming Gary is gone.

Even so, GB is a highly regarded location for a HC, or any coach. It's simply a well-run organization with a rich history of winning championships.

all that said, I don't see Policy firing MLF. That will make an extension complicated.
 

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
7,377
Reaction score
2,829
Location
Land 'O Lakes
Hey EG I'm on board with most of your comments so this is an exception. I don't think the Packers, even a heathy team, is a "turnkey SB team".
I don't mind disagreement.

You're right of course, because there is no true "turnkey" team in the league. Every team has warts of different colors and size. We certainly do. However, there is no disputing that this is a playoff team with most of the pieces to win a championship. The right coach could do it sans injuries.

Any potential HC would see the Packers as one of the best opportunities instead of having to build up a struggling team...such as Miami or Arizona.
 

Magooch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 15, 2021
Messages
2,152
Reaction score
2,191
I don't mind disagreement.

You're right of course, because there is no true "turnkey" team in the league. Every team has warts of different colors and size. We certainly do. However, there is no disputing that this is a playoff team with most of the pieces to win a championship. The right coach could do it sans injuries.

Any potential HC would see the Packers as one of the best opportunities instead of having to build up a struggling team...such as Miami or Arizona.
It would be an interesting topic of consideration.
Barring injuries, on pure quality of "roster construction," where would GB rank?
Preseason but prior to the Parsons trade it seemed like most pundits and the like had us with a fringe top-10 roster. With Parsons in the mix I have to think that alone pushes you into the top 10 and probably flirting with the top 5.

Not taking too terribly deep a dive into who will be back or not in free agency but assuming roughly this team makeup returns healthy in 2026 I would think it's fair to suggest it's a top-5 roster, or pretty dang close to it... and that to me *should* put you firmly in the SB-contender bracket.

Or, alternatively...looking at potential/probably HC vacancies for the next season...who would be a more appealing vacancy than us?
 

Sanguine camper

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
2,928
Reaction score
1,365
I
I don't mind disagreement.

You're right of course, because there is no true "turnkey" team in the league. Every team has warts of different colors and size. We certainly do. However, there is no disputing that this is a playoff team with most of the pieces to win a championship. The right coach could do it sans injuries.

Any potential HC would see the Packers as one of the best opportunities instead of having to build up a struggling team...such as Miami or Arizona.
I think most prospective coaches look first at the QB positio. No QB, no chance in the short term.

With Love being a good but not elite QB, most coaches would still look favorably at the job.
 

JoePack

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 6, 2019
Messages
134
Reaction score
70
I want the Univ.of Indiana college football coach as soon as we are done. This man is a no-nonsense type coach and really knows what to do.
Critique all you want. He has what mlf doesn't.
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
6,401
Reaction score
2,752
I want the Univ.of Indiana college football coach as soon as we are done. This man is a no-nonsense type coach and really knows what to do.
Critique all you want. He has what mlf doesn't.
I live in Indiana, but I rarely watch college football so I haven't noticed them. I see they're rated #1, wow that surprises me. That coach must be something, because IU is not usually known as a big football power.
 

Firethorn1001

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
2,697
Reaction score
2,203
I live in Indiana, but I rarely watch college football so I haven't noticed them. I see they're rated #1, wow that surprises me.

This surprises me. I would think just by default you would hear something. Not like they are Ohio State where it might be a little 'ho hum'. I would think there would be massive talk everywhere about them where you would know just by being alive in Indiana...
 

chemist

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 12, 2023
Messages
361
Reaction score
333
I want the Univ.of Indiana college football coach as soon as we are done. This man is a no-nonsense type coach and really knows what to do.
Critique all you want. He has what mlf doesn't.
Sounds like just type of HC that can bring a different kind of culture to this team. That would be a welcome change. A breath of fresh air
Curt Cignetti has definitely done something at IU. Before he came IU had a 9-27 2021- 2023. Since he came IU turned completely around and the 2 years he's been there they 24-2. Very impressive.
 
Last edited:

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
6,401
Reaction score
2,752
This surprises me. I would think just by default you would hear something. Not like they are Ohio State where it might be a little 'ho hum'. I would think there would be massive talk everywhere about them where you would know just by being alive in Indiana...
You would think so, wouldn't you? But the days of newspapers are over and I don't watch local news. And most people around here like Notre Dame. IU was once a huge topic of discussion for basketball back in the Bobby Knight days. Maybe because IU isn't known for football is why I haven't heard anything. Plus Notre Dame has disappointed numerous times when they've had the opportunity, so maybe people don't want to get their hopes up.
 

Members online

Top