McCarthy admits a mistake, sort of.

[Packerlifer]

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/po...everses-course-on-packers-teaching-philosophy

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Well, if this change results in another 1-2 start but the Packers are playing better at the end of the season I'm absolutely fine with it.

 

[Poppa San]

If you don't make mistakes, you are not trying hard enough. The error is in repeating the same ones.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

The rookies were fine. Injuries and lack of depth were the real issue.

 

[JBlood]

I like MM talking about education, and it's importance in all things. Education leads to excellence.

The pinnacle of success in the NFL is the Championship. 37.5% of teams get into the playoffs, where anything can, and has happened. Only 2 teams in 14 had a chance to win it all in the 60s. Today, once in the playoffs, you still have a better chance of getting to a Championship than in 1962.

Is it a sign of excellence when you're in the top 37.5%? I think that warranted a C (maybe a D) when in school. And it will get easier as they expand the tournament to more teams. Getting into the playoffs will become something like the NHL and NBA, where only the dregs have no chance to participate. The regular season becomes a long exhibition prior to the real season. Coaches will be fired for not winning in the playoffs instead of not winning in the regular season.

We're close to that right now.

 

[rodell330]

The mistake was not giving Rodgers more weapons when the offense looked abysmal. Can't tell me a hobbled Adams was better than Janis or Abby and that Tim Masthay was the best option at punter.

 

[Packerlifer]

I think as more dribbles out from 1265 Lombardi Avenue about 2015 it reveals that the Packers, and MM in particular, had more of a hangover from the NFC Championship loss at Seattle than they admitted or we cared to think.

Hopefully it's out of their system now and they're ready to be more the Packers we've come to expect.

 

[Sky King]

I think as more dribbles out from 1265 Lombardi Avenue about 2015 it reveals that the Packers, and MM in particular, had more of a hangover from the NFC Championship loss at Seattle than they admitted or we cared to think.

Hopefully it's out of their system now and they're ready to be more the Packers we've come to expect.

A very plausible theory. The coaching realignment experiment from last season may serve as a perfect example of the knee-jerk reaction to that hangover and it turned into an unmistakable flop -- transforming a once potent offense into a struggling unit of underachievement. That wasn't caused exclusively by Jordy's absence.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

A very plausible theory. The coaching realignment experiment from last season may serve as a perfect example of the knee-jerk reaction to that hangover and it turned into an unmistakable flop -- transforming a once potent offense into a struggling unit of underachievement.

I have a hard time believing the collapse at the end of the NFCCG against the Seahawks had anything to do with the wrong decision made regarding the coaching staff.

 

[Sky King]

I have a hard time believing the collapse at the end of the NFCCG against the Seahawks had anything to do with the wrong decision made regarding the coaching staff.

We'll never know if he would have done the same things had they run the table instead. It's all theory. But I have a hard time believing he would have deviated from what may have brought them the ultimate in success.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

This makes perfect sense. The Packers only ever really bring in young guys (it's not like there's a huge influx of vets from other teams) so OF COURSE he'd be teaching to the youngest guys because all the current older guys WERE the younger guys years before!

 

[El Guapo]

Why is this an either/or discussion? We spend $155 million a year on player salaries, millions more to upgrade the stadium every five years, yet we can't afford a few more assistants so that our head coach doesn't have to choose between teaching the youngsters and coaching up the veterans. It doesn't make sense to me, unless McCarthy feels that it's his specific tutelage that is stretched too thin. I doubt that though. There are plenty of bright minds in the coaching community.

 

[El Guapo]

I'm also not buying the hangover argument. McCarthy tweaks things every year, as he should. Never be complacent as a coach or your players will mimic you.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

I have a hard time believing the collapse at the end of the NFCCG against the Seahawks had anything to do with the wrong decision made regarding the coaching staff.

Maybe, though I was talking with another fan a few months ago about the changes that were made during last year's offseason, and he mentioned that when one of the Seahawk's cornerbacks went down (think it was Sherman) that MM had said he didn't notice that had happened, or something similar to that. So I do think, even despite my own doubts about the effectiveness of the changes, that MM did do them probably with the intention of having a more panoramic view of the game and things going on in it. But I'll concede as we saw last year play out, those changes were far from the only things that caused our problems, and ultimately I do think this year is going to hinge on having better production out of the receiving corps, a more stable o-line particularly at the guard and center positions, and most importantly Rodgers just can't get bogged down psychologically again like he was last year.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Why is this an either/or discussion? We spend $155 million a year on player salaries, millions more to upgrade the stadium every five years, yet we can't afford a few more assistants so that our head coach doesn't have to choose between teaching the youngsters and coaching up the veterans. It doesn't make sense to me, unless McCarthy feels that it's his specific tutelage that is stretched too thin. I doubt that though. There are plenty of bright minds in the coaching community.

I guess McCarthy is talking about the way to teach the different installments of the playbook on the field which mostly happens in 11-on-11 drills. In those scenarios the coaching staff has to work with the entire team as a group and it´s close to impossible treating veterans and youngsters differently.

Maybe, though I was talking with another fan a few months ago about the changes that were made during last year's offseason, and he mentioned that when one of the Seahawk's cornerbacks went down (think it was Sherman) that MM had said he didn't notice that had happened, or something similar to that. So I do think, even despite my own doubts about the effectiveness of the changes, that MM did do them probably with the intention of having a more panoramic view of the game and things going on in it. But I'll concede as we saw last year play out, those changes were far from the only things that caused our problems, and ultimately I do think this year is going to hinge on having better production out of the receiving corps, a more stable o-line particularly at the guard and center positions, and most importantly Rodgers just can't get bogged down psychologically again like he was last year.

I agree that McCarthy giving up play calling to be more universally involved with the entire team was a reaction to the playoff loss to the Seahawks and a mistake in hindsight. His decision to have Clements and Bennett mostly doing the same job aside of the play calling and not installing a designated receivers coach were mind-boggling though and in my opinion weren´t made because of what happened in Seattle.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

I have a hard time believing the collapse at the end of the NFCCG against the Seahawks had anything to do with the wrong decision made regarding the coaching staff.

I think it may have been a product of repeated gaffes on special teams that led McCarthy to relinquishing play-calling duties in favor of becoming more involved in other areas. The botched onside kick against Seattle may have been the proverbial last straw.

 

[jrock645]

I think the bigger issue is the overlap between Bennet and Clements and the lack of a WR's coach. MM giving up play calling wasn't the problem. The complete breakdown in play by the receivers was. Even scaling the grade to make it more favorable without Jordy, and factoring injuries those guys were awful.

The logical thing would be send Bennet back to wr's, have Clements as OC and playcaller. The whole Bennet as OC, but Clements as assoc head coach and playcaller didn't make the first bit of sense.

I like the idea of MM actually being able to oversee the team as a whole. It makes sense. I think the knee jerk reaction might be just going back to how things were, when they got part of the transition right.

The defense and st's got better, and the units seemed to play to each other better. That was important, and definitely noticeable. Problem was, MM took back play calling and we still just couldn't manage to make the couple plays late in the Arizona game to win it. How much of that had to do with MM being too involved in his play sheet to be in tune with what was happening on defense?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I think the bigger issue is the overlap between Bennet and Clements and the lack of a WR's coach.

I think promoting Bennett to offensive coordinator was made in an effort to keep him with the Packers. It was a strange move with his and Clements reaponsibilities overlaping way too much though. Holding on to both of them this offseason with McCarthy calling the plays was mind-boggling.

I agree that not having a designated receivers coach was a huge mustake as well.

Problem was, MM took back play calling and we still just couldn't manage to make the couple plays late in the Arizona game to win it. How much of that had to do with MM being too involved in his play sheet to be in tune with what was happening on defense?

I don't think McCarthy calling the plays had anything to do with Randall blowing the coverage on Fitzgerald in overtime.

 

[weeds]

"Although he stopped short of admitting it was a mistake, he seemed to indicate that when he continued with this: “And, uh, yeah. So that was …”

And then McCarthy paused before closed his press conference with this: “Yeah. Good way to end it.”"

LMAO ... 'nuff said Mike. We can dig the rap and we're hip.

Hey, it's served me pretty well in 30+ of supervision... I'll share it because someone almost touched on it above. My favorite is "The only people not making mistakes are those who aren't doing anything. So get on it..."

 

[Packerlifer]

http://www.packersnews.com/story/sp...ndering-packers-play-calling-puzzle/85597356/

 

[longtimefan]

The mistake was not giving Rodgers more weapons when the offense looked abysmal. Can't tell me a hobbled Adams was better than Janis or Abby and that Tim Masthay was the best option at punter.

Or MM knew the hobbled Rodgers was part of the problem

 

[El Guapo]

It sounds like Rodgers is sounding the "all clear" alarm now that there is less confusion about the coaching duties. One could theorize that the system McCarthy put in place was a good strategy but just poorly executed. Who knows. Stick with what works while it's working, making minor tweaks toward improvement.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

One could theorize that the system McCarthy put in place was a good strategy but just poorly executed.

The Packers not having a designated receivers coach was for sure a mistake. I'm not convinced that McCarthy giving up play calling was the reason for the offense struggling though.

 

[Sky King]

Injuries notwithstanding, under the coaching structure that was in place last season Rodgers and the receivers under-performed to varying degrees. That hardly seems like a coincidence, especially since the position groups were quickly reorganized once again after last season had ended. McCarthy's actions spoke louder than words.

 

[rodell330]

Or MM knew the hobbled Rodgers was part of the problem

Meh, a hobbled Rodgers is still better than70% of the qbs in the NFL. He's not the reason the offense was so bad last year.