There are still too many cooks in the Packers offensive kitchen

Everyone blames the lack of a potent passing game for the offensive woes in 2015.  How about the lopsided coaching structure and has been enough been done to fix it?

I think we can all agree that Mike McCarthy giving up play calling in 2015 can be considered a failure; while he was able to be involved more in the defense and special teams the offense suffered without his guidance.  

While McCarthy essentially capitulated by reclaiming play calling duties midway through the season, the effects of giving up playing calling are still present, especially in the coaching staff.

With McCarthy relinquishing playing calling duties, the entire offensive coaching staff was thrown into disarray.  Tom Clements took over as play caller and was promoted from offensive coordinator to associate head coach.  To fill Clement’s old position of offensive coordinator, Edgar Bennett was promoted but then to fill Bennett’s old role, quarterbacks coach Alex Van Pelt was given the odd assignment as the position coach for both quarterbacks and wide receivers.  One very likely possibility for the regression of the wide receivers group as a whole was having a coach with no previous experience coaching wide receivers being overwhelmed by having to work with two completely separate positions. 

Some of that has now been fixed; Van Pelt is now just the quarterbacks coach again, while Luke Getsy was promoted from quality control coach to wide receivers coach.  Again every position group has it’s own coach but the logjam at the top of the coaching staff remains. 

Tom Clements is still the associate head coach while Edgar Bennett is still the offensive coordinator and I’d argue the other reason why the offense took a step back was because no one inside the organization knew who was in charge and who was responsible for what. 

Running a football team in one sense is just like any other business; if you’ve ever been in a company with a weak organizational structure, where you have to report to lots of bosses with no real chain of command you’ll know it’s a total mess as everyone fights to remain the “boss”.  While McCarthy is definitively still at the top, he likely will not be overseeing the offense while play calling meaning the vagueness of Clements and Bennett’s roles will continue.    

The real reason why everyone has the same job as before is because demoting a coach would be essentially throwing them under the bus and McCarthy cannot afford to do that given his history of hiring former acquaintances and Pitt coaching alums.   But on the other side, without a clear chain of command on the offense some of the dysfunction from 2015 is likely to persist. 

0 points
 

Comments (20)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
SpudRapids's picture

June 24, 2016 at 02:24 pm

It's not a foregone conclusion captain negativity. Straight from the article posted:

"The collectively bargained drug policy allows for the NFL to discipline players “found through sufficient credible documented evidence … to have used, possessed or distributed performance-enhancing substances,” even if they didn’t fail a test or run afoul of the law. A footnote says “sufficient credible evidence includes but is not limited to: criminal convictions or plea arrangements; admissions, declarations, affidavits, authenticated witness statements, corroborated law enforcement reports or testimony in legal proceedings; authenticated banking, telephone, medical or pharmacy records; or credible information obtained from Players who provide assistance pursuant to Section 10 of the Policy.”

Seems to me like there is a lot more to this before anyone is suspended IF they even have sufficient evidence.

0 points
0
0
Dr.Rodgers's picture

June 24, 2016 at 03:28 pm

That would require some hard evidence. Neal, Matthews, and Peppers have all denied involvement. The nfl is probably doing "do diligence" prior to opening day.

0 points
0
0
NashvilleCheesehead's picture

June 25, 2016 at 08:41 am

Due diligence....

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

June 24, 2016 at 02:34 pm

Lol.

"The Packers don't have any players. They're terrible."

Two players are interviewed.

"WE COULD LOSE TWO PLAYERS!"

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

June 24, 2016 at 03:37 pm

"Just telling the backups to get ready."

Because they all check in here daily to hear what we, the knuckleheads, have to say? ;)

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

June 24, 2016 at 05:46 pm

When they fail a drug test I'll start to worry.

0 points
0
0
mschulz's picture

June 24, 2016 at 12:32 pm

I think it is easy to blame offensive inefficiencies on McCarthy relinquishing play calling duties, but the reason he did it was to improve other parts of the team. Special Teams, Defense and Game Management all improved last year and the offense did only marginally better when McCarthy took back play calling. With a healthy o-line and Jordy back the offense should be better no matter who is calling the plays. It doesn't mean I am advocating for anyone else to call the plays this year besides McCarthy.

0 points
0
0
Icebowler's picture

June 25, 2016 at 08:25 pm

Thanks for getting this blog back on subject of this particular article.

0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

June 24, 2016 at 01:52 pm

COW don't get your hopes up I would not worry to much about a report from a terrorist backed news outlet , your Vikings Probably fed the story to Al Jazeera .

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

June 24, 2016 at 05:48 pm

Cow is the Packer anti Christ.

0 points
0
0
ray nichkee's picture

June 24, 2016 at 06:34 pm

No, he's just an ass.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

June 25, 2016 at 08:01 am

Sorry 4th but that's an insult to anti-Christs everywhere. Most are much less negative than Cow. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
PETER MAIZ's picture

June 25, 2016 at 10:06 am

Al Jazeera is not terrorist backed. It's a reliable independent news organization, much like Reuters. But some of you people see a grasshopper and yell "terrorist".

0 points
0
0
Michalske's picture

June 25, 2016 at 09:00 am

To actually comment on the article, this is not something I am worried about.

There is always too much work for a coordinator. Do you put the guy in the box or do you use him on the sideline talking to the players?

Clements strength is analysis during the game; Bennet's working with the players. So Clements goes in the box and provides analysis to McCarthy (where he was prior to 2015 anyway), and Bennet goes on the sideline and relieves McCarthy of that part of the coordinator's job (which he previously did because Clement's was in the box).

McCarthy still has extra time to monitor defense and ST because he doesn't need to do the "talk to the offensive players" part of the co-ordinator's job.

They worked this out in the second half of last season. They will be fine.

0 points
0
0
PETER MAIZ's picture

June 25, 2016 at 10:02 am

I totally agree with Thomas. Just because McCarthy has an association with Pitt, that does not in any sense make Pitt a great recruiting ground for coaching personnel. These boneheaded actions are well known and documented.

0 points
0
0
PETER MAIZ's picture

June 25, 2016 at 10:02 am

I totally agree with Thomas. Just because McCarthy has an association with Pitt, that does not in any sense make Pitt a great recruiting ground for coaching personnel. These boneheaded actions are well known and documented.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 25, 2016 at 11:58 am

I have mocked GB for its coaching hierarchy.

Jan 22, 2016: "All of our position coaches should be either Associate Head Coaches or Assistant Head Coaches. If MM refuses, at the least we need an Associate Head Coach/Strength and Conditioning position created ASAP."

More recently, I suggested that we split the WR and QB position coaches, but make Clements the Assistant HC/aerial coordinator liaison or some such nonsense.

MM needs to hire better subordinates. If things suffer when MM doesn't personally involve himself, that doesn't say much for his colleagues/staff, or for him.

I've never heard MM say he has to involve himself in the defense for fear it will go to hell if he doesn't: that is because Capers is the undisputed coach of the defense, and is a strong coach with pretty good assistants under him. The questionable position coaches under Capers were hired prior to Capers, like Winston Moss (what does this guy do? 2009 -2013 ILB coach - not good results - and 2014 to present OLB - well, he got Peppers up to speed, little else). Whitt was a quality control coach in 2008, and was promoted to CB coach when Capers arrived.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

June 25, 2016 at 01:54 pm

"I’d argue the other reason why the offense took a step back was because no one inside the organization knew who was in charge and who was responsible for what."

I guess you can make this "argument" if you really want to, but I'm not seeing much more than wild speculation. What evidence do you have that "no one knew who was in charge or responsible for what?" Plenty of teams have assistant head coaches. Why do you assume that there was no clear division of duties, and that the chain of command wasn't clear among the players and coaches? Just because it isn't clear to you doesn't mean that it wasn't clear to them.

0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

June 25, 2016 at 02:45 pm

Got to laugh. Whenever I hear things like this I focus at how any said person gets when the news gets out. If its me and i did nothing, im going on the news, calling out people and demanding proof now. On the other hand if their is some truth to it, said person will deny and keep quiet wondering who has the evidence and what evidence do they have? Thus, i have my feelings and these three had injuries to deal with thats a commonality. Just sayin

0 points
0
0
lou's picture

June 26, 2016 at 10:55 am

In the NFL (a pass first league) not having a WR coach and as many as 3 coaches responsible for the offensive game plan is just BIZARRE, there is no other way to explain it. It must have been an over reaction to the Seattle debacle when McCarthy was forced to stop calling the plays and led to a massive over hall. In a career with IBM I have seen many times were several people were in effect the "IT Director" only because they were a son or son-in-law of the firms owner, that did work because under that person was a "manager" who did the job expected of the "director". You can't have people with just "titles" and no direct duties. Again, just BIZARRE last year.

0 points
0
0