1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Will a new coach really do that much?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by musccy, Oct 30, 2005.

  1. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    I've read so many complaints calling for MS' head because of penalties, poor execution, curious/debatable play calls, motivation, etc.

    However, if you think that a new coach is going to magically make all of these issues go away, I suggest that you devote 3 hours of your sunday and objectively focus on any other NFL team of choice. I'm willing to bet that they will have quite a few blunders that look awfully familiar.

    I can see the argument for canning MS in the event that he loses his players, or he's grossly underperfoming, esp. relative to what you see on any other NFL roster...but I don't see that, and until that point, MS is still the HC and Go Pack Go!
     
  2. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    look at our defense
     
  3. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Will a new coach really do that much? Yes.

    I could go on and on about how mike sherman sucks, and about how anybody could do better, but ill take a different approach to this one.

    You said: However, if you think that a new coach is going to magically make all of these issues go away, I suggest that you devote 3 hours of your sunday and objectively focus on any other NFL team of choice.

    I've done this. And I've watched a team magically transform from a zero to an AFC elite team. It is also the team we just so happen to be playing in a few hours, the cincinnati bengals.

    Good coaching, combined with a decent GM (which we DO have, its just he has a lot of sherman abortions to take care of) would turn this team into a super bowl contender. The last couple of years everyone has looked at GB as a cute team who will probably make the playoffs and go 1 and out. And they are right. Sherman doesnt have what it takes, and when we fire him, hopefully we get someone who does have what it takes.
     
  4. WinnipegPackFan

    WinnipegPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,943
    Ratings:
    +0
    This was started to get Pack66 going again , right ?
     
  5. CaliforniaCheez

    CaliforniaCheez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    The new coach will bring in "his" staff. His way of doing things.

    He will have to change Brett and make him learn a new offense.

    Ted Thompson will have to draft the players that fit the new system get rid of the guys drafted for the current system.

    The team will then be in an all out rebuild.
     
  6. TOPackerFan

    TOPackerFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    2,084
    Ratings:
    +0
    I've looked at it. It ain't that good. I don't know if they showed the Queenies game in Norway, but our D stunk.
     
  7. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    Actually no...I saw someone else blame MS on injuries which I didn't quite agree with.

    I really didn't have any intentions to have this post escalate, but it was late and I should have known better.
     
  8. packedhouse01

    packedhouse01 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,560
    Ratings:
    +1
    Of the many pitfalls of the Mike Sherman coaching era, the one that stands out the most is lack of teaching. I can still remember that wonderful coaching staff that Mike Holmgren brought with him when he signed on in Green Bay. They were great teachers and they took a team with below average talent and taught them how to play the game well. They placed expectations on every player and if they didn't meet those expectations, they were gone. It sure helps to have great talent, but it's not always the level of talent you have, it's what you do with the talent you have.

    I think a new coach for the sake of getting a new coach would be wrong, but getting a new coach who will emphasize the importance of playing the game well and who can motivate players will be much more successful than what we have right now.
     
  9. packman31

    packman31 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    97
    Ratings:
    +0
    Just think if Holgram would of stayed in Greenbay and not gone to seattle. I think Greenbay would of gone to a few more superbowls don't you ?
     
  10. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    It's way better than last year!
     
  11. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    Well...

    I don't know if all of you know how I feel on this matter..Perhaps I haven't quite made myself quite clear...

    but musscy...if you want to keep a MEDIOCRE to POOR head coach (or..in other words..sucky..) to keep some continuity of a BAD SYSTEM and PHILOSOPHY..then go right ahead...

    And in case you haven't noticed..it doesn't decades to rebuild a team like some of you are suggesting in todays NFL (except if you're Mike Sherman). ..a 4-12 team one year can be 12-4 the next...and I don't buy that learning new offense..new personnel..etc...blah blah blah..Favre won't buy it..etc...

    These men are professionals..and i'm sure there are plenty of coaches who would love to have Brett Favre to work with and would adopt an offensive philosophy around Favre (the heart and soul of the PAckers) One that he is familiar and comfortable with.(Hell..Favre could write up his own offense at this point and call his own plays), and one that would also work with the personnel on the GB packers..(once again...except if you are SherRossley..they prefer to do things in their own unique..inept way)

    (this stuff isn't rocket science..after all....)

    But once again, I guess what you are saying musscy..is that the Packer's should keep a mediocre to crappy coach for....what reason now...?

    Continuity? To not hurt Mike Sherman's feelings because he's a nice guy..even though he sucks?

    Believe me...there is no reason whatsoever that Sherman shouldn't be replaced....and if you are rebuilding TT...you will never fully rebuild to get to where you want to go without getting rid of your losing coach...

    Mike Sherman is a LOSER...accept it...and move on to better days!
     
  12. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    Holmgren, b4 this year, has been very dissapointing in Seattle with some pretty good teams. He had a few GREAT teams while in GB and only won one super bowl, so it's a little presumptious to assume he'd win more if he stayed.

    Of course he could have...and I think the talent was there in '02 and '03 to do so...but again, I wouldn't say it was a sure thing.

    packedhouse...I see what you're saying about the teaching. I do see a few gaps where it would appear that aspect could be improved upon, but I do see sings where this has/does occur, e.g...I read that MS et al sat down w/ Brett after the TB game and told him he needed to stop trying to force things and they worked w/ him a bit on that. Since that game he's played as well as he has in his career, IMO. Just one example.
     
  13. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    man..that's a stretch..

    i find that one hard to believe...musscy...

    (where did you read this about Sherman sitting down with Favre after TB game and suddenly he's a HOF QB again..like he never was before?)

    Sounds like some fairy story that you made up...to cover Sherman's ***..

    (How come nobody else has read this or mentioned it before...? )
     
  14. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    Pack66...my point is that a change of scenery won't make the problems go away.

    Slowik was added because MS/Donnatell didn't blitz on 4-26...everything appeared to be solved in the preseason and v. Carolina, but....

    TT was added as a GM and everyone loved the move..."he's the next Ron Wolf" and will have excellent drafts. Still way too early to say much about him, but it appears that he jeapordized this season for the future, and that there are some very frugal times to come.

    Bates...greatest thing since sliced bread, will save the team...but then the d is lit up v. MN.

    just a few examples...you can add a new coach, gm, whatever, and sure, the novelty factor will make everything appear great at first, but the grass isn't always greener...that's all I'm trying to say.
     
  15. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    Someone else mentioned it on this board, I couldn't tell you who anymore, it's a vauge memory, but u have to admit there is a big difference between the first 3 games, and the last 3...something like 7:1 interceptions...and that's even w/ key players dropping like flies.
     
  16. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    I would that to the HOF QB you have on the roster..(which you would never do...)

    I wouldn't necessarily attribute that to Sherman..Favre was pretty successful throughout his career without MS...(i'd want to see some proof..)

    Also...nobody that I can think of wanted Slowik as DC..that was a Sherman crony appointment..and not many were high on Donatell either..although in my mind..he was scapegoated by Sherman...and was better than Slowik...

    You see...all this is happening in Mike Sherman's universe...(Rossley, Slowick, Donnatel...)..So you really can't say there's been much of a change...because they were all part of the "Sherman cancer"..that affects this team...so the finger still points back to MS...

    Also..it's hard to blame Bates..because he's been a miracle worker this year with Sherman's garbage that was left to him on defense ..so that also points back to Mike Sherman the GM..

    Musscy...it very simple...

    Did you ever have the kid in class who got a D on his paper but who complained bitterly that he should have gotten a better grade because he worked on it so hard and put in so much effort, and stayed up all night..yet the kid who worked on his paper for 10 mins got the A....

    Mike Sherman is that kid...he dots all his i's and crosses his t's..but still comes up short because he simply does not have what it takes to succeed...

    That's it..really..He's the Charlie Brown...of the NFL coaching world....

    ("i've got a rock..")

    (I don't know about you..But I don't want Charlie Brown leading the Green Bay PAckers into MEdiocrity! But that's just me..i guess..)
     
  17. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    True, MS was a poor defensive GM (and was canned because of it), so you can't entirely blame Bates (and I'm not blaming him, just saying it's not all rosey once you hire someone else)...

    but if you're going to say that bates can't be held entirely responsible due to what the GM gave him, then to some extent, the same needs to be said of MS. He did a pretty good job w/ the offense as a GM, had a great line etc, but it dissolved once TT got here and a lot of the problems on O can be traced to the line.

    With your "D" analogy, 5 winning seasons is not a d. But the playoffs? Some of the blame belongs on his shoulder, yes, but...

    1) the pakcers aren't the only team to have issues in the playoffs (sort of the point I was trying to make in the first post). For example, Holmgren hasn't won a playoff game yet in Seattle

    2) The players need to shoulder some responsibility in many of those losses.

    My overall point...it's the whole package...a loss and or win is not because of one player or coach.
     
  18. PPierce

    PPierce Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2005
    Messages:
    94
    Ratings:
    +0
    We need a new coach. MS is uninspiring and we need to revamp this team from the top down. IF this keeps up, no doubt he WILL go.
     
  19. yourout

    yourout Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2005
    Messages:
    352
    Ratings:
    +0
    "True, MS was a poor defensive GM (and was canned because of it), ...."
    No......MS was a poor GM period.
     
  20. musccy

    musccy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,854
    Ratings:
    +1
    Under his watch the Packers had one of the best o-lines and running games in the league. Additions like Terry Glenn, Javon, and Fergusson, and re-signing Driver at a cheap price were all solid moves. As an offensive GM, I think he did a decent job.
     
  21. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    How can you ask this question. Look at what Marvin Lewis did for the Bengals. We seen it first hand today.
     
  22. Chamuko

    Chamuko Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    1,067
    Ratings:
    +0
    In MS we have a Donkey leading our army of dogs, deer, hogs, and maybe a couple of lions and tigers, we NEED a LION to lead our team, someone with the heart and soul of a winner, someone who can inspire his felow coaches and players and get the best out of them while turning them into leaders themselves. Clearly Shermy is not that kind of a guy... He should be canned as of today and we shoudl give Bates a try.
     

Share This Page