Mike McCarthy's Future

[Patriotplayer90]

S0 only some of BB's games without Brady count?

More relevant is to look at all of his games without Brady, not just the ones that fit your point of view.

The reality is that Belichick was not a successful head coach at all until Bledsoe got hurt and Brady came in.

Not to take anything away from. The best coaches off all time tended to have a great QB too - Lombardi and Starr, Walsh and Montana, Noll and Bradshaw.

Belichick is the only coach in the last 30 years to get the Browns to 11 wins. He still won 45 percent of his games with a completely inept Browns organization and no Brady and was despised and run out of town , compared to McCarthy winning 25 percent of his games with no Rodgers and still somehow viewed as a competent coach

If you have to dig that far into a coach's past to make a point, you are reaching. You are ignoring the fact that NE also had the #6 scoring defense during Brady's first year, a luxury they did not have the previous year. The following year, their defense was average and the wonder Boy couldn't do enough to take them to the playoffs. Then his next two SBs featured #1 and #2 defense. But somehow Brady is single-handedly responsible for his success, right?

If we are going to judge coaches by things which happened 20 years ago, why not give Mike Shanahan a call? He was really good then, so he must be now, right? The game has evolved, and Belichick is two steps ahead of everyone else and has proven that in recent seasons where he's had stints with backup QBs. McCarthy's act is stale, and it shows every time Rodgers goes down.

 

[Carl 2]

Belichick is the only coach in the last 30 years to get the Browns to 11 wins. He still won 45 percent of his games with a completely inept Browns organization and no Brady and was despised and run out of town , compared to McCarthy winning 25 percent of his games with no Rodgers and still somehow viewed as a competent coach

If you have to dig that far into a coach's past to make a point, you are reaching. You are ignoring the fact that NE also had the #6 scoring defense during Brady's first year, a luxury they did not have the previous year. The following year, their defense was average and the wonder Boy couldn't do enough to take them to the playoffs. Then his next two SBs featured #1 and #2 defense. But somehow Brady is single-handedly responsible for his success, right?

If we are going to judge coaches by things which happened 20 years ago, why not give Mike Shanahan a call? He was really good then, so he must be now, right? The game has evolved, and Belichick is two steps ahead of everyone else and has proven that in recent seasons where he's had stints with backup QBs. McCarthy's act is stale, and it shows every time Rodgers goes down.

Well, the Browns were an entirely different franchise then. Literally since there were no Browns for 3 years so I wouldn't say that's a fair assessment.

I see no reason to not look at his entire coaching career when evaluating him without Brady.

I never said Brady was single-handedly responsible.

My entire point was he didn't do well before Brady and looking only at the recent years doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Carl 2]

Certainly possible that I've been missing something in the discussion, but I always thought the point was that, WITH a HOF QB, the Pats under BB have been in the SB about half the time and won it about a third of the time, while our guy has one ring to show for it.

I was just discussing the fans who bring up only the times BB has been good without Brady, but ignore the times he wasn't.

Yes, BB has been one of the best ever. Can't argue that. I just don't think parts of his career should be ignored to try to make a point.

 

[Carl 2]

We also need to keep in mind that BB is a giant exception and not the rule.

He is the only one in recent history with that much success. Peyton, likely Eli, Brees, Rothlisburger, Warner are all recent HOF QBs (or will be) who have not have the same success as BB and Brady.

Actually, he is the only one ever with that many SBs as a head coach.

Comparing MM to him and only him and saying MM isn't good enough is basically saying, "MM isn't as good as possibly the best ever, therefore he's not good enough."

 

[Half Empty]

Not much to argue with there. However, if we take BB out of the discussion, we're basically saying that McCarthy is tied with everyone (except behind the immortal Tom Coughlin) else this century for SB wins, reducing the head coaching argument to which blind squirrel finds a nut that year. No problem with doing that, but then we shouldn't be touting MM.

 

[rodell330]

What the hell are you smoking? Last I checked this is his 12th year as head coach.

Did you even read the post I was responding to!!! Obviously not. Come one bro smh...I know he hasn't been here that long good grief

 

[Patriotplayer90]

We also need to keep in mind that BB is a giant exception and not the rule.

He is the only one in recent history with that much success. Peyton, likely Eli, Brees, Rothlisburger, Warner are all recent HOF QBs (or will be) who have not have the same success as BB and Brady.

Actually, he is the only one ever with that many SBs as a head coach.

Comparing MM to him and only him and saying MM isn't good enough is basically saying, "MM isn't as good as possibly the best ever, therefore he's not good enough."

I wasn't comparing him to BB, as he is on a completely different tier, just holding him to the standards of a good coach.

You are correct that it is extremely difficult to win consistently without a QB. But one player absolutely should not make the difference between a SB hopeful to one with a .250 winning percentage. That's a 4-12 record across a 16 game season. Coaches get fired for that record, regardless of the QB situation.

The roster hasn't been great over the years, but it's not a 4-12 roster. With average QB play and an average coaching staff, there is no reason why a team with a complete offense (we were #7 in rushing in 2013 and our rushing game has new life with Jones), a good front 7, and a good pair of safeties should be this bad. The reason is coaching. Simple as that.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

I wasn't comparing him to BB, as he is on a completely different tier, just holding him to the standards of a good coach.

You are correct that it is extremely difficult to win consistently without a QB. But one player absolutely should not make the difference between a SB hopeful to one with a .250 winning percentage. That's a 4-12 record across a 16 game season. Coaches get fired for that record, regardless of the QB situation.

The roster hasn't been great over the years, but it's not a 4-12 roster. With average QB play and an average coaching staff, there is no reason why a team with a complete offense (we were #7 in rushing in 2013 and our rushing game has new life with Jones), a good front 7, and a good pair of safeties should be this bad. The reason is coaching. Simple as that.

Except for Jason Garrett.

 

[Raptorman]

Belichick is the only coach in the last 30 years to get the Browns to 11 wins. He still won 45 percent of his games with a completely inept Browns organization and no Brady and was despised and run out of town , compared to McCarthy winning 25 percent of his games with no Rodgers and still somehow viewed as a competent coach

If you have to dig that far into a coach's past to make a point, you are reaching. You are ignoring the fact that NE also had the #6 scoring defense during Brady's first year, a luxury they did not have the previous year. The following year, their defense was average and the wonder Boy couldn't do enough to take them to the playoffs. Then his next two SBs featured #1 and #2 defense. But somehow Brady is single-handedly responsible for his success, right?

If we are going to judge coaches by things which happened 20 years ago, why not give Mike Shanahan a call? He was really good then, so he must be now, right? The game has evolved, and Belichick is two steps ahead of everyone else and has proven that in recent seasons where he's had stints with backup QBs. McCarthy's act is stale, and it shows every time Rodgers goes down.

First lets get one thing straight. Belichick is a defensive guy. He was the DC for the Giants from 85 - 90. During that time they won 2 Super Bowls. The Giants defense ranked 1, 2, 9, 13, 2, and 5 in points per game during that time period. Since coming to NE his team has ranked in the top 10 in defense in PPG 13 out of 18 years. As far as I know, he is the only person with 7 Super Bowl rings.

 

[rmontro]

The reality is that Belichick was not a successful head coach at all until Bledsoe got hurt and Brady came in.

The Browns are a toxic dumpster fire though. Hard to criticize someone too hard for not being successful with that team. Plus, they say you learn more from failure than winning. Maybe Belichick used his time in Cleveland to develop his coaching approach. Besides which, he also acts as GM in New England, so he has more control.

 

[Packer Brother]

Why do the Patriots seem to overcome injuries and reach the SB? You don't see them consistently ignoring the main issues.

 

[Passepartout]

Why is everybody discussing his future just became Aaron Rodgers is out as he lead the team to the playoffs about each and every single year.

 

[Carl 2]

The Browns are a toxic dumpster fire though. Hard to criticize someone too hard for not being successful with that team. Plus, they say you learn more from failure than winning. Maybe Belichick used his time in Cleveland to develop his coaching approach. Besides which, he also acts as GM in New England, so he has more control.

The Browns were literally a different franchise back then since they didnt even exist for 3 years in the 90s They even had 5 playoff years shortly before BB got there.

 

[Carl 2]

Why do the Patriots seem to overcome injuries and reach the SB? You don't see them consistently ignoring the main issues.

Because they are the giant exception of the NFL.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Why is everybody discussing his future just became Aaron Rodgers is out as he lead the team to the playoffs about each and every single year.

Because most fans here are dumb enough to eat the poison candy Sports Illustrated feeds them on the matter (it's littered with MM on the hotseat articles) and ignore the voice of reason Troy Aikman has for Mike McCarthy's superb playcalling skills.

Why do the Patriots seem to overcome injuries and reach the SB? You don't see them consistently ignoring the main issues.

Because Roger ****stick Goodell keeps giving them fuel to do it, AKA injustly suspending Brady for nothing. Do that and you're going to get them out to teach him a lesson.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Because most fans here are dumb enough to eat the poison candy Sports Illustrated feeds them on the matter (it's littered with MM on the hotseat articles) and ignore the voice of reason Troy Aikman has for Mike McCarthy's superb playcalling skills.



Because Roger ****stick Goodell keeps giving them fuel to do it, AKA injustly suspending Brady for nothing. Do that and you're going to get them out to teach him a lesson.

Any coach can look like a superb playcaller with Rodgers being the one who is execution them. McCarthy was exposed in 2015 when Nelson went down.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Any coach can look like a superb playcaller with Rodgers being the one who is execution them. McCarthy was exposed in 2015 when Nelson went down.

MM called less than half the games that year in case you've quickly forgotten.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

MM called less than half the games that year in case you've quickly forgotten.

It doesn't matter who is calling plays, they all derive from the same vanilla offensive scheme which was exposed in 2015. The only reason we've had success since it's because Rodgers turned on God mode midway through last season.

 

[ARPackFan]

Check out this video from a segment on NFL Players Only (NFL Network) where James Jones answers the question "What Team would you come back and play for right now?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=158&v=S9uJcMnjz20

James gives his answer starting at 2:00 and at about 2:35 he makes a comment on receiver routes.

 

[RepStar15]

“Yes, Mike McCarthey who has taken this team to playoffs for the past 8 season is on the chopping block before Don Capers.” - Said no one ever

 

[Half Empty]

Maybe just didn't spend enough time, but did the previous two posts have anything to do with this thread (or, really, much of anything else?). If so, please enlighten me.

 

[Alex]

Why do the Patriots seem to overcome injuries and reach the SB? You don't see them consistently ignoring the main issues.

Because instead of forcing their players to fit a system they tailor their game to what each of their players excel at and simply ask them to do that and nothing more. I wish more coaches would do this, especially the stubborn *** coaches in GB.

 

[OldSchool101]

Dom Capers

If it gets him out of the DC job I’d seriously consider it!

 

[ARPackFan]

Maybe just didn't spend enough time, but did the previous two posts have anything to do with this thread (or, really, much of anything else?). If so, please enlighten me.

James Jones remarks in the very short video - “I always loved the way Sean Payton dials up plays and every time I think that’s a heck of a route, I wish we had route concepts like that. Every player that goes there balls out with Drew Brees and Sean Payton calling the plays.”

Just more indication that Mike McCarthy is not exactly the offensive genius we have led to believe. This supports the position of other posts in this thread the MM is just an average guy who has had the extreme fortune of one HOF QB followed by another probable HOF QB. He's the Forrest Gump of NFL coaches.

 

[rmontro]

We also need to keep in mind that BB is a giant exception and not the rule.

He is the only one in recent history with that much success. Peyton, likely Eli, Brees, Rothlisburger, Warner are all recent HOF QBs (or will be) who have not have the same success as BB and Brady.

Actually, he is the only one ever with that many SBs as a head coach.

I think that some of older fans, who were around to see Lombardi - some of us have a different perspective. Rather than looking at Belichick and thinking "Oh well, he's the best, there's nothing we can do", we wonder why we aren't the best, and what we can do to set the standard, instead of looking up at the standard. Lombardi never would have settled for being second best.