Fire Matt LaFleur

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Broncos were very good and after Parsons went out it hurt even more. The Ravens dominated the whole game. Now the Bears...No excuse.

I will give you that the Broncos are very good, but I still think we could have won that game, but agree that once Parsons went down, it seemed like the air came out of all our tires. We were up 23-21 at the time it happened, with under a minute to go in the 3rd Q.

The Ravens game was an odd one. We made a lot of mistakes, but were still only down 24-27 in the 4th Q. The defense then just collapsed.

The 2 losses to the Bears. After halftime of those games, we were outscored by a combined total of 22-44.

 

[milani]

I shouldn't laugh

Yes, you should.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

How this is destined to go down: Lafleur and Packers hem and haw the next week, can’t close the gap, all the other HC candidates sign in the meantime, Hafley gets HC job elsewhere, MLF leaves.

Adam Stenavich promoted to HC.

Even worse....Rich Bisaccia is promoted to HC.

 

[milani]

I will give you that the Broncos are very good, but I still think we could have won that game, but agree that once Parsons went down, it seemed like the air came out of all our tires. We were up 23-21 at the time it happened, with under a minute to go in the 3rd Q.

The Ravens game was an odd one. We made a lot of mistakes, but were still only down 24-27 in the 4th Q. The defense then just collapsed.

The 2 losses to the Bears. After halftime of those games, we were outscored by a combined total of 22-44.

The problem with young or very young teams is that one momentum changing event can destroy their sense of confidence and focus. In other words, they choke. That is the challenge of the head coach. But it still does not explain how the oldest player on the roster, McManus, falls apart.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The problem with young or very young teams is that one momentum changing event can destroy their sense of confidence and focus. In other words, they choke. That is the challenge of the head coach. But it still does not explain how the oldest player on the roster, McManus, falls apart.

Very valid point on the pitfall of a younger team. You would hope that they can compensate with their younger, more virile bodies. It also isn't like these guys are new to pressure, they probably faced it in college.

Also, good point with coaches and their need to be able to keep players focused. Seems football is all about big splashy, individual plays. After such, that player gets up and celebrates himself to the crowd. Sure, they have group celebrations in the EZ after scores, but there again, seems more like drama and show.

 

[milani]

Very valid point on the pitfall of a younger team. You would hope that they can compensate with their younger, more virile bodies. It also isn't like these guys are new to pressure, they probably faced it in college.

Also, good point with coaches and their need to be able to keep players focused. Seems football is all about big splashy, individual plays. After such, that player gets up and celebrates himself to the crowd. Sure, they have group celebrations in the EZ after scores, but there again, seems more like drama and show.

So true. The old school was do not celebrate until the W is IN HAND. Do not get distraught over a failure but do not get ecstatic over success. Also, the college ranks see all players in the 18-22 age for the most part. Once they get to the pros they are on the same field with others sometimes 5-10 and even 15 years older. If you are on the field with Rodgers you think he is your grandfather.

 

[adambr2]

Actually, Steno was a very good OL coach. It's tough to know how good he is in his current role because it's more behind the scenes.

He could be a great head coach. The key is to hire the right coordinators. Just like LaFleur is a very good OC but a marginal HC, Stenavich may be the opposite.

Maybe he would be. I really have no idea and I’ve given up trying to figure out who would do what well when it comes to coaching. I’m pretty sure when MLF was fired he was running a pretty bad offense in Tennessee and I think when we hired Mike McCarthy he was the OC for a terrible 49er offense.

It’s possible Stenavich had very limited oversight in his role with MLF basically running the offense and being assisted by Bisaccia.

 

[Sanguine camper]

I think at bare minimum if he's staying don't let him call plays anymore

MLF has bigger faults than playcalling. Who on the staff would you trust to call plays other than MLF? I don't see anybody. Certainly not Luke Getsy.

Where MLF falls down is in clock and time out management and making the wrong personnel moves. While hindsight is 20-20, giving the kicking job back to McManus was a huge mistake.

 

[adambr2]

MLF has bigger faults than playcalling. Who on the staff would you trust to call plays other than MLF? I don't see anybody. Certainly not Luke Getsy.

Where MLF falls down is in clock and time out management and making the wrong personnel moves. While hindsight is 20-20, giving the kicking job back to McManus was a huge mistake.

How many Packer playoff seasons ending in the playoffs have been closely tied to special teams in recent memory? Definitely Saturday. The last game against the 49ers. No doubt.

Obviously, the Bostick game.

Just gross.

 

[Thirteen Below]

Further, I would add... if the organization was happy and willing to pay Matt his "market rate" (which I am sure he is asking for), it would already be done by now.

So we can likely say with some degree of confidence:

1. The team doesn't intend to just fire him outright
2. The team doesn't intend to pay him market rate / without reservations

And as such we should be able to reasonably conclude that:

1. The team wants to ultimately extend LaFleur, but with reservations - they will need him to come down from his desired deal before they're willing to continue
2. The team is intending to trade and is either actively shopping for offers, playing it slow and waiting for offers to arrive, or in the process of working out a deal

It does *seem* at least that there is some degree of hesitation on the team's part. One would think that if the team were absolutely convinced LaFleur was the guy to lead them to the Super Bowl they would not have much to quibble over with regards to salary. If you want to pay 10m and LaFleur wants 12m, 15m...wouldn't you be okay with paying an extra 2-5m/yr if you were convinced it would bring home the Lombardi?

I do also note that there's still been relatively little activity yet from anyone else (besides firings, I mean). Harbaugh seems to be the "big prize" for many but he is being rather slow and selective. I do wonder if other teams aren't in any rush to get anything done as they're first keeping an eye on the "LaFleur-situation"?

Ironically, Hafley is probably a factor too. If he leaves for a HC job, we will obviously need a new DC. But it's tough to convince a coordinator to join when your HC is on the tail end of his contract. So we would need clarity at HC in all likelihood before replacing our DC, too.

Really good thoughts, and a lot of other people are starting to suggest the same basic situation. I think it's going to break down pretty much like that. It's possible that a number of systemic problems that have been nagging us for years end up getting resolved here.

 

[Thirteen Below]

But it still does not explain how the oldest player on the roster, McManus, falls apart.

I wouldn't be shocked to learn, in the weeks to come, that McManus aggravated that injury - maybe even in the game itself, trying to put too much leg into that 55-yard field goal. Seems odd that he'd just fall completely off the cliff like that without some sort of reason.

 

[BrokenArrow]

While hindsight is 20-20, giving the kicking job back to McManus was a huge mistake.

Yeah... no.

 

[BrokenArrow]

I wouldn't be shocked to learn, in the weeks to come, that McManus aggravated that injury - maybe even in the game itself, trying to put too much leg into that 55-yard field goal. Seems odd that he'd just fall completely off the cliff like that without some sort of reason.

It seems nobody remembers Crosby in 2012. You don't cast aside good kickers due to a bad stretch.

 

[milani]

How many Packer playoff seasons ending in the playoffs have been closely tied to special teams in recent memory? Definitely Saturday. The last game against the 49ers. No doubt.

Obviously, the Bostick game.

Just gross.

Maybe the last 2 against Frisco. One there and one here.

 

[OldSchool101]

That's an interesting stat. I'm not that surprised that Kraft picked up first downs on direct snaps, although once that becomes successful, opposing Ds will account for it.

I'm not a big fan of running plays that start from shotgun or direct snap. The runner is 4 or 5 yards behind the LOS when he first gets the ball.

Even so, Kraft might be strong enough to pull that off consistently. I'd rather see them develop a tush push with Kraft under center. Everyone knows it's coming, but as Philadelphia has shown, it can have a high conversion rate.

That could work. I’ve also thought they can bring Our 6th OL as eligible and he can jump under Center and just plow forward. We’re talking 645lb of weight in one area churning. Just a thought. They’d need to practice it first and ensure Kinnard holds onto the ball properly this time!

 

[OkieCheesehead]

Yeah I don't see Rodgers coming back either. Too bad he had to go out on such a low note, not even a TD pass.

Well he's headed to the HOF. I've had issues with the guy and his super-sized ego, especially the last few years, but he gave us a lot of great, winning football. We were fortunate he played for our team. I'll look forward to seeing his name go up inside Lambeau.

Oh without a doubt. He was the best there was. Some of my favorite memories as a Packer fan came from Rodgers. I wonder if his Packer HOF ceremony will be as awesome as Brett’s was

 

[El Guapo]

Where MLF falls down is in clock and time out management and making the wrong personnel moves.

Agree 100%

While hindsight is 20-20, giving the kicking job back to McManus was a huge mistake.

Without knowing how Haversik would have done is not even 20-20...it's 20-xx.

Haversik missed two XPs to cool the love-fest from fans and staff. We don't know how he would have done moving forward. We might have been doomed either way, but I would rather have a proven veteran in a cold playoff game than an relatively untested young kicker.

I'll give you props if Haversik is our kicker next year, eclipses McManis' stats, and kicks the game winner in a playoff game (preferably, the Super Bowl)!

 

[Sanguine camper]

Agree 100%


Without knowing how Haversik would have done is not even 20-20...it's 20-xx.

Haversik missed two XPs to cool the love-fest from fans and staff. We don't know how he would have done moving forward. We might have been doomed either way, but I would rather have a proven veteran in a cold playoff game than an relatively untested young kicker.

I'll give you props if Haversik is our kicker next year, eclipses McManis' stats, and kicks the game winner in a playoff game (preferably, the Super Bowl)!

McManus had his problems the entire season. He missed 4 FG's between 40-49. In today's NFL, that should be a 90% kick. Bringing back the veteran didn't help one bit. He was one of the main reasons the Packers lost 2 regular season games and a playoff game. The unproven rookie really couldn't have done much worse.

It's not an easy decision but there should've been some indication in practice that McManus wasn't sharp. I have a hard time believing he was superb in practices and then waited until the games to screw up.

 

[adambr2]

It’s ironic that the Matt Lafleur negotiations are a microcosm of his coaching style.

Slow, methodical, can’t make a decision quickly or under pressure.

 

[JoePack]

If it goes the way of the last 4 games, I'm afraid he loses and Policy wins.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Even worse....Rich Bisaccia is promoted to HC.

Hate to quote myself, but here is an article on Bisaccia. JFC, are the Packers just going to go with him and settle for special teams to be below ave.? I really don't buy all that "young players make it more difficult to field good special teams."

Why the Packers still like Rich Bisaccia

The three units that the Green Bay Packers actually support on special teams have been pretty good.

www.acmepackingcompany.com

 

[OldSchool101]

One concern I do have for MLF (and Brian to an extent) is how will they fair going forward into the future with less than ideal draft capital. Brian (and Matt through him) greatly benefited from EXTRA draft picks or draft value in 2022,2023,2024 drafts.

2022:
#22 Quay Walker
#53 (used to pair with our natural #59 to move to #34 Christian Watson)

2023:
#42 Luke Musgrave
#103 overall draft value (net value from swapping picks our #15 to their #13 + swapped our 5th for their 6th)

2024:
#41 (used to trade back into an array of drafted players below.
#45 Edgerrin Cooper
#168 Kitan Olodapo
#190 (used to pair with #126 and move up to select Evan Williams at #111)

Today we do not have high level Day 1 or Day 2 “bonus draft picks”. This imo will 100% put the squeeze on the ability to replace departing FA’s.
Zero Top 50 selections also gives our competition an advantage of selecting high impact players ahead of us. We’ve been very spoiled in the draft lately and for 2-4 years we’ve relied heavily on bonus draft capital to keep the Roster cost down and fill in vital gaps for departing players. Matt will largely need to “make do” with his current group with a speculative transition from losing some high level contributors like Romeo Doubs, our leading WR in 2025.

FIVE Top50 draft prospects come off the board going to our NFC North before we are on the clock
17,18,25,49,50

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Maybe he would be. I really have no idea and I’ve given up trying to figure out who would do what well when it comes to coaching. I’m pretty sure when MLF was fired he was running a pretty bad offense in Tennessee and I think when we hired Mike McCarthy he was the OC for a terrible 49er offense.

It’s possible Stenavich had very limited oversight in his role with MLF basically running the offense and being assisted by Bisaccia.

I agree, as fans, it is really hard to decipher and breakdown which assistant coaches are and aren't doing their jobs. Which is why it usually falls on the OC, DC or HC to shake things up and fire and rehire coaches under them. I guess the problem you have there is if the OC, DC or HC are complacent and don't want to lose their jobs either, you just get yourself a dysfunctional lame duck coaching staff.

I guess it is a good sign when you are losing coaches to other teams and a promotion. It must mean that the coach is over performing with the Packers. That said, I can't name a lot of coaches that left GB for better job offers. I know that there have been some, I just can't think of them. Hafley may be the first DC we have lost in a long time because of that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Still no announcement of a deal or a no deal with MLF.

This was an interesting observation though:

McAfee mentioned that there feels like a market for LaFleur around the NFL, Schefter said, “There will be a big market for Matt LaFleur. Because if the Green Bay Packers don’t work it out, I’m telling you right now Matt LaFleur would get more money from other teams, and there would be multiple teams that would be willing to step in and offer draft pick compensation to the Green Bay Packers to get it done.”

"There are two intriguing things about this report from Schefter. First, it is that LaFleur appears willing to take less money from the Packers than he would get elsewhere in order to stay in Green Bay. The second is that, should talks break down, the Packers would be able to get draft picks for their current head coach via a trade."

Green Bay Packers: ESPN Insider Expects Matt LaFleur Back In 2026, But Describes Tempting Scenario If Talks Fall Apart

The Green Bay Packers are currently negotiating a contract extension with head coach Matt LaFleur despite many questioning his future with the franchise

wisportsheroics.com

 

[Magooch]

This is turning into a really tricky situation.

Honestly, in spite of our total collapse this year...it kinda feels like LaFleur still has more leverage here?

- He knows that we don't want a "lame duck" or "prove it" year...and by extension understands that if Hafley leaves it's going to be very hard to sign a replacement DC (and possibly other assistants) when the HC is going to be gone in a year

- He knows that any even somewhat "proven" replacement will likely cost us as much as LaFleur is asking for. Look at guys like Ben Johnson, Liam Coen, Mike McDonald, etc. They had no HC experience and immediately got like 13m+ per year.

- He recognizes that nearly 1/3rd of the league is looking for head coaches right now. That means he will likely have a bigger "market" AND that we'll potentially have more competition in signing a replacement. This ties into the above - if we want an "in-demand" hire, we will have to outbid others (and I don't think there is really any "Ben Johnson" type guy available this cycle)

- He effectively has complete "veto control" over any possible trade

- He knows that at the end of the day we DO want to continue with him as HC, at least to some extent. The fact that they are still in negotiations and haven't cut them off and/or fired him makes that pretty clear

- He knows that he does have a "market" and can likely find a team that would meet his requested contract demands. So the idea of a "conditional" deal (i.e. 3 year deal that adds +2 years with a NFCCG or something) doesn't carry any weight when he can get 5 years no-strings-attached elsewhere

- He knows that it would be best for us to resolve the situation sooner than later. Getting a deal done enables us to work on assistant positions sooner (esp. if Hafley leaves); if we ultimately decide to move on from LaFleur we don't want to find ourselves in a situation where our top candidates have already signed elsewhere. Either way, a speedier resolution is preferred

So, I don't really know what we do here.
I can certainly understand that position from LaFleur's perspective (and anyone saying things like "He should take a worse contract cuz he hasn't won anything for us!" are being ridiculous lol), but I get the team's trepidation as well. LaFleur has been here for 7 years; if we sign him to a 5-year extension (as he seemingly wants) we could very well find ourselves in a spot where he's been here for 10 years with no Super Bowl and we're still on the hook to pay him another $30m or something. So yeah...I don't really know lol